No abstract

Results from three studies demonstrate that victims' justice-related satisfaction with punishment is influenced by the kind of feedback they receive from offenders after punishment. In contrast to previous studies that found a discrepancy between anticipated and experienced satisfaction from punishment (Carlsmith, Wilson, & Gilbert, 2008), participants were able to accurately predict their satisfaction when made aware of the presence or absence of offender feedback acknowledging the victim's intent to punish. Results also indicate that victims were most satisfied when offender feedback not only acknowledged the victim's intent to punish but also indicated a positive moral change in the offender's attitude toward wrongdoing. These findings indicate that punishment per se is neither satisfying nor dissatisfying but that it is crucial to take its communicative functions and its effects on the offender into account. Implications for psychological and philosophical theories on punishment motives as well as implications for justice procedures are discussed.

Identifying relative idiosyncratic and shared contributions to judgments is a fundamental challenge to the study of human behavior, yet there is no established method for estimating these contributions. Using edge cases of stimuli varying in intrarater reliability and interrater agreement-faces (high on both), objects (high on the former, low on the latter), and complex patterns (low on both)-we showed that variance component analyses (VCAs) accurately captured the psychometric properties of the data (Study 1). Simulations showed that the VCA generalizes to any arbitrary continuous rating and that both sample and stimulus set size affect estimate precision (Study 2). Generally, a minimum of 60 raters and 30 stimuli provided reasonable estimates within our simulations. Furthermore, VCA estimates stabilized given more than two repeated measures, consistent with the finding that both intrarater reliability and interrater agreement increased nonlinearly with repeated measures (Study 3). The VCA provides a rigorous examination of where variance lies in data, can be implemented using mixed models with crossed random effects, and is general enough to be useful in any judgment domain in which agreement and disagreement are important to quantify and in which multiple raters independently rate multiple stimuli.

Three studies using between-subjects designs examined the effect of facial tattoos on two stages of a courtroom trial. The presence of a facial tattoo affected judgments of guilt, but it did not lead to higher punishment ratings. This was the case for different types of crime varying in offense seriousness and for faces varying in perceived trustworthiness. The effect on guilt was fully mediated by the perceived criminal appearance of the tattooed defendant. These findings are the first that systematically address the question whether facial tattoos can bias legal outcomes. They further suggest that the psychological mechanisms by which an activated criminal stereotype influences legal judgments can differ for two stages of a trial. Policy implications are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. We investigated whether consequentialist motives may underlie punishment decisions in single-round (i.e., one-shot) social dilemmas in which there is no prospect of reciprocity. In particular, we used an incentivized public goods game to examine how the prospect of receiving information on the effect of punishment (i.e., information that indicates potential regret and intention for future behavioral change on the part of the transgressor) affects people’s punishment decisions. We also took person-situation interactions into account and studied whether prosocial individuals (i.e., persons high in Honesty-Humility and Social Value Orientation) punish more strongly when they receive consequentialist information. The data did neither reveal the hypothesized effects of information availability on punishment decisions nor were these effects conditional on dispositional prosociality. We discuss potential limitations of these findings as well as open questions for future research.