Driving forces behind informal sanctions
Abstract
This paper investigates the driving forces behind informal sanctions in cooperation games and the extent to which theories of fairness and reciprocity capture these forces. We find that cooperators' punishment is almost exclusively targeted toward the defectors, but the latter also impose a considerable amount of spiteful punishment on the cooperators. However, spiteful punishment vanishes if the punishers can no longer affect the payoff differences between themselves and the punished individual, whereas the cooperators even increase the resources devoted to punishment in this case. Our data also discriminate between different fairness principles. Fairness theories that are based on the assumption that players compare their own payoff to the group's average or the group's total payoff cannot explain the fact that cooperators target their punishment at the defectors. Fairness theories that assume that players aim to minimize payoff inequalities cannot explain the fact that cooperators punish defectors even if payoff inequalities cannot be reduced. Therefore, retaliation, i.e., the desire to harm those who committed unfair acts, seems to be the most important motive behind fairness-driven informal sanctions. Copyright The Econometric Society 2005.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Cooperation levels are significantly higher when punishment of free-riders is possible compared to when it is not.
“Our results suggest that, while cooperation levels are significantly higher when punishment of free-riders is possible compared to when it is not—a result that has been established multiple times in the literature (Fehr and Gächter, 2000, 2002; Falk et al., 2005; Chaudhuri, 2011)—OT also shows a positive effect on cooperation, irrespective of the availability of a sanctioning mechanism.”
From Oxytocin promotes altruistic punishment (2017) · cites this paper as Falk et al., 2005
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.90.4.980 · Cited by 4,416 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Antisocial Punishment Across Societies
Herrmann, B., Thöni, C., & Gächter, S. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1153808 · Cited by 2,038 · see citing works
Relationship of gender differences in preferences to economic development and gender equality
Falk, A., & Hermle, J. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aas9899 · Cited by 378 · see citing works
Self-citationThe evolution of antisocial punishment in optional public goods games
Rand, D. G., & Nowak, M. A. (2011) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms1442 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
Intergroup conflict and Intra-Group punishment in an experimental contest game
Abbink, K., Brandts, J., Herrmann, B., & Orzen, H. (2010) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.100.1.420 · Cited by 264 · see citing works
Oxytocin promotes altruistic punishment
Aydogan, G., Furtner, N. C., Kern, B., Jobst, A., Müller, N., & Kocher, M. G. (2017) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsx101 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
- Authors
- Falk, A., Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U.
- Affiliations
- University of Bonn (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Falk, Armin
- Venue
- Econometrica
- Publisher
- The Econometric Society
- Published
- 2005-11
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2017-2030
- ISSN
- 0012-9682 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0262
- OpenAlex
- W3122702071
- Cited by
- 451
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 32
- FWCI
- 51.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Econometrica (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Game Theory and Applications
- Keywords
- informal sanctions, retaliation, fairness, reciprocity, cooperation games, payoff inequality, principle of fairness, social norms
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review