Intergroup bias in third-party punishment stems from both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination

Schiller, Bastian; Baumgartner, Thomas; Knoch, Daria (2014). Intergroup bias in third-party punishment stems from both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination. Evolution and human behavior, 35(3), pp. 169-175. Elsevier 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.12.006

Text Schiller_Baumgartner_Knoch_EHB_2014.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (442kB) | Request a copy

Social norms pervade almost every aspect of social interaction. If they are violated, not only legal institutions, but other members of society as well, punish, i.e., inflict costs on the wrongdoer. Sanctioning occurs even when the punishers themselves were not harmed directly and even when it is costly for them. There is evidence for intergroup bias in this third-party punishment: third-parties, who share group membership with victims, punish outgroup perpetrators more harshly than ingroup perpetrators. However, it is unknown whether a discriminatory treatment of outgroup perpetrators (outgroup discrimination) or a preferential treatment of ingroup perpetrators (ingroup favoritism) drives this bias. To answer this question, the punishment of outgroup and ingroup perpetrators must be compared to a baseline, i.e., unaffiliated perpetrators. By applying a costly punishment game, we found stronger punishment of outgroup versus unaffiliated perpetrators and weaker punishment of ingroup versus unaffiliated perpetrators. This demonstrates that both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination drive intergroup bias in third-party punishment of perpetrators that belong to distinct social groups.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

1 since deposited on 06 Oct 2014
0 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item