Periodic Reporting for period 1 - EmoPun (How the expression of moral emotions affects third party punishment)
Reporting period: 2018-09-10 to 2020-09-09
Across cultures and time, societies have relied upon cooperation to flourish. Cooperation has an Achilles' heel that can perturb such flourishing, though: individuals’ temptations to free ride on others’ cooperation. How is cooperation maintained when individuals have incentives to cheat? Across disciplines, researchers have suggested that cooperation is made possible by third party punishment (TPP) – that is, observers’ punishment of non-cooperators. TPP has its own free riding problem, though; it is costly in itself, and people could be tempted to allow others to incur the costs of punishing cheaters.In addition, evidence has shown that punishers but are sometimes disliked and avoided, perhaps because of uncertainty about their motives. Due to these costs, the evolutionary origins of TPP are mysterious, as are the incentives for engaging in TPP in contemporary society.We argue that moral emotions may provide a solution to the costliness and ambiguity of monetary punishment because emotions convey different motives and behavioral intentions. By solving the problem of the ambiguity of a punisher’s motives and intentions, the expression of moral emotions might contribute to the stability of human cooperation. We used behavioral economic games, the third party punishment game followed by a trust game, to find out whether the expression of emotion enhances reputation. Results supported our hypothesis: third parties who expressed anger or disgust after seeing an individual act selfishly by not sharing money, were subsequently entrusted with more money than third parties who didn't express anything, or third parties who financially punished the selfish individual by taking money away from them. Furthermore, third parties who expressed anger or disgust at the same time as financially punishing were subsequently trusted more than third parties who only financially punished. These findings show that the expression of moral emotions can enhance the reputation of people who engage in third party punishment, providing a potential solution to the puzzle of third party punishment, and thereby helping to enable the evolution of human cooperation.
Findings have implications for societally relevant issues. Expressions of outrage increasingly influence social and political events.Outrage can shape and enforce social norms, mobilize groups of activists, and shape political events. The research reveals how the expression of emotions underlying outrage – disgust and anger – can be used by individuals to gain reputation benefits, helping to explain why expressions of outrage have become increasingly prevalent. These insights could also be of great value to institutions and government agencies who seek to discourage certain behaviors: doing so by using emotion expressions, instead of, or as well as, costly punishments could be more beneficial in many circumstances.
Findings have implications for societally relevant issues. Expressions of outrage increasingly influence social and political events.Outrage can shape and enforce social norms, mobilize groups of activists, and shape political events. The research reveals how the expression of emotions underlying outrage – disgust and anger – can be used by individuals to gain reputation benefits, helping to explain why expressions of outrage have become increasingly prevalent. These insights could also be of great value to institutions and government agencies who seek to discourage certain behaviors: doing so by using emotion expressions, instead of, or as well as, costly punishments could be more beneficial in many circumstances.
Three behavioral economics games were conducted, closely following the planned designs detailed in the Grant Agreement. Study 1 showed that third parties who expressed anger or disgust towards non-cooperators (who chose not to share in a Dictator game) were subsequently trusted more (given more money in a Trust Game) than parties who didn’t express. Also in Study 1, third parties expected disgust expressions to be seen as more trustworthy than anger expressions, whereas an anger expression was expected to be seen as more aggressive than disgust. Accordingly, Player 4 participants rated disgust expressers as more trustworthy than anger expressers, and anger expressers were perceived as more aggressive than disgust expressers.
Study 2 investigated whether expressing anger and disgust would enhance a third party’s reputation more than financial punishment. Both anger and disgust expressing third parties were trusted with more than financially punishing third parties. Expressers were also rated as more trustworthy and less aggressive than financial punishers. But, in Study 2, disgust and anger expressers were not rated differently in trustworthiness or aggressiveness. Accordingly, Player 3s expected anger and disgust to be seen as more trustworthy than financial punishment, and they expected financial punishment to be seen as more aggressive than disgust, but not more aggressive than anger. They expected anger to be seen as more aggressive than disgust.
Having established that expressing anger or disgust enhance the reputation of third parties even above financial punishment, Study 3 examined whether anger and disgust could enhance the reputation of third party financial punishers when expressed at the same time as punishing. Third parties who expressed anger or disgust at the same time as punishing were indeed trusted with more money than third parties who only punished. And third parties who didn’t punish but did express were entrusted with more than third parties who neither punished nor expressed. Punishing increased perceived aggressive but also more trustworthy, and expressing increased perceived aggressiveness but also trustworthiness. Accordingly third parties expected to be seen more aggressive if they punished and if they expressed, but they did not expect expressing or punishing to affect trustworthiness.
These three studies will be reported in article currently in preparation that will be submitted to a high impact journal.
Alongside this research, additional studies were conducted for projects also related to emotions, cooperation and morality. Specifically, two studies were conducted to investigate the role of intent on moral judgements of purity (disgust-eliciting) violations. Findings have been published in Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. And studies were conducted to investigate the role of reputation management in motivating people avoid immoral individuals. Findings will be published in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior.
Study 2 investigated whether expressing anger and disgust would enhance a third party’s reputation more than financial punishment. Both anger and disgust expressing third parties were trusted with more than financially punishing third parties. Expressers were also rated as more trustworthy and less aggressive than financial punishers. But, in Study 2, disgust and anger expressers were not rated differently in trustworthiness or aggressiveness. Accordingly, Player 3s expected anger and disgust to be seen as more trustworthy than financial punishment, and they expected financial punishment to be seen as more aggressive than disgust, but not more aggressive than anger. They expected anger to be seen as more aggressive than disgust.
Having established that expressing anger or disgust enhance the reputation of third parties even above financial punishment, Study 3 examined whether anger and disgust could enhance the reputation of third party financial punishers when expressed at the same time as punishing. Third parties who expressed anger or disgust at the same time as punishing were indeed trusted with more money than third parties who only punished. And third parties who didn’t punish but did express were entrusted with more than third parties who neither punished nor expressed. Punishing increased perceived aggressive but also more trustworthy, and expressing increased perceived aggressiveness but also trustworthiness. Accordingly third parties expected to be seen more aggressive if they punished and if they expressed, but they did not expect expressing or punishing to affect trustworthiness.
These three studies will be reported in article currently in preparation that will be submitted to a high impact journal.
Alongside this research, additional studies were conducted for projects also related to emotions, cooperation and morality. Specifically, two studies were conducted to investigate the role of intent on moral judgements of purity (disgust-eliciting) violations. Findings have been published in Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. And studies were conducted to investigate the role of reputation management in motivating people avoid immoral individuals. Findings will be published in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior.
The research takes the study of third-party punishment (TPP) well beyond the current state of the art by examining the effects of emotions expressed instead of, or concurrently with, punishment. This has not been done before, despite recognition that emotions influence punishment and cooperation. By demonstrating that the expression of emotions (anger and disgust) enhance the reputation of punishers, findings offer a new solution to the puzzle of third party punishment: why do people punish wrongdoers, even when not directly affected themselves, when it is costly to do so? To date research had shown that punishers were not liked or rewarded for doing so, but our research has shown that punishers who express anger or disgust are liked, and trusted more than people who don't punish, or don't express. Findings show that expressing emotions can make it beneficial for third parties to punish non-cooperators, which provides a possible solution to the question of how third party punishment could have evolved. And, because third party punishment is thought to have been essential for the evolution of human cooperation, the ability and tendency for the expression of moral emotions, may also have been key to enabling the evolution of human cooperation. Findings also have important applications in the modern world. By showing that punishers who express emotions are liked and trusted more, individuals, governments and institutions who seek to discourage bad behaviors can do so more effectively, while reducing the chances of breeding resentment or distrust.