Cited by 59Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsForgiveness and Related Behaviors

Compassion meditators show less anger, less punishment and more compensation of victims in response to fairness violations

Open access
McCall, Cade, Steinbeis, Nikolaus, Ricard, Matthieu, Singer, Tania·2014·Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Fairness violations elicit powerful behavioral and affective responses. Indeed, people are willing to incur costs to sanction unfair behavior. Here we study the possible impact of long-term mental training in socio-affective capacities such as compassion on altruistic punishment and compensatory behavior in economic games. To this end we recruited a group of long-term meditation practitioners (LTPs) who had engaged in an average of 40 K h of mental training exercises including compassion-related meditation, along with a group of meditation-naïve controls. Participants played several adaptations of the dictator game in which they had the opportunity to punish the dictator both when they were the recipients of the dictator's offer and when they were third-party witnesses to the dictator's treatment of an anonymous second player. Compared to controls, LTPs were less likely to punish when they were the victims of fairness violations. However, both groups punished equivalently when they witnessed others receiving unfair treatment. In post-task questionnaires, controls reported significantly more anger in response to unfair offers than LTPs, although fairness judgments did not differ between groups. These data suggest that because the LTPs were less angered by unfair treatment of themselves, they punished that behavior less. However, when they witnessed the unfair treatment of others, they engaged in norm-reinforcing punishment. Finally, when participants played an additional game which included the opportunity to recompense victims, LTPs were more likely to do so. Together these data point to differential approaches to justice whereby LTPs engaged less in vengeful, retributive justice and focused more on norm reinforcement and the restoration of equity. These differences suggest that social preferences are plastic and that altruistic responses to unfairness may be shaped by the prolonged cultivation of prosocial motivation, altruism, and compassion.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00424

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Compassion reduces punishment behavior in long-term compassion meditation practitioners even when they were themselves the victim of fairness violations.

    “In contrast to empathic distress, compassion reduces punishment behavior in long-term compassion meditation practitioners even when they were themselves the victim of fairness violations [52].”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Fehr B. Sprecher S. Underwood L. G. (2009). The Science of Compassionate Love: Research, Theory, and Applications. Oxford; Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McCall, C., Steinbeis, N., Ricard, M., & Singer, T.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (DE)
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
  • Mind and Life Institute (US)
Corresponding author
McCall, Cade
Venue
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2014-12-09
Volume
8
Pages
424-424
ISSN
1662-5153 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2077267764
Cited by
59
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4
FWCI
12.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
Keywords
compassion meditation, fairness violations, altruistic punishment, third-party punishment, compensatory behavior, anger, social preferences, social plasticity, prosocial motivation, dictator game, retributive justice

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