Intuitive Cooperation and Punishment in the Field

Artavia-Mora, Luis; Bedi, Arjun S.; Rieger, Matthias

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2769179

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 24 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our data suggest that people's reliance on either intuitive or deliberative decision making affects the extent to which distributive or efficiency concerns dominate. These results are consistent with previous research showing that deliberation favours utilitarian judgments in moral dilemmas (24)(25)(26)(27)(28), that equality concerns are rooted in intuitive emotional processing (4,22,23), and that fairness is intuitive (47,48). Our evidence qualifies previous findings by showing that it is not only egalitarianism per se but, more generally, the concern for individuals' relative payoffs that responds to intuition.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Deliberation Favours Social Efficiency by Making People Disregard Their Relative Shares: Evidence from US and India

Capraro¹,

Corgnet

Espín

et al. 2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Deliberation Favours Social Efficiency by Making People Disregard Their Relative Shares: Evidence from US and India

Capraro¹,

Corgnet

Espín

et al. 2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Time pressure and deliberation affect moral punishment

Philippsen,

Mieth,

Buchner

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The deliberate-morality account implies that moral punishment should be decreased with time pressure and increased with deliberation while the intuitive-morality account predicts the opposite. In three experiments, moral punishment was examined in a simultaneous one-shot Prisoner’s Dilemma game with a costly punishment option. The players cooperated or defected and then decided whether or not to punish their partners. In Experiment 1, the punishment decisions were made without or with time pressure. In Experiment 2, the punishment decisions were immediate or delayed by pauses in which participants deliberated their decisions. In Experiment 3, participants were asked to deliberate self-interest or fairness before deciding whether to punish their partners. Different types of punishment were distinguished using the cooperation-and-punishment model. In Experiment 1, time pressure decreased moral punishment. In Experiment 2, deliberation increased moral punishment. So far, the evidence supports the deliberate-morality account. Experiment 3 demonstrates that the effect of deliberation depends on what is deliberated. When participants deliberated self-interest rather than fairness, moral punishment was decreased. The results suggest that unguided deliberation increases moral punishment, but the effects of deliberation are modulated by the type of deliberation that takes place. These results strengthen a process-based account of punishment which offers a more nuanced understanding of the context-specific effect of deliberation on moral punishment than the deliberate-morality account.

show abstract

Rethinking spontaneous giving: Extreme time pressure and ego-depletion favor self-regarding reactions

Capraro

Cococcioni

2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous experimental studies suggest that cooperation in one-shot anonymous interactions is, on average, spontaneous, rather than calculative. To explain this finding, it has been proposed that people internalize cooperative heuristics in their everyday life and bring them as intuitive strategies in new and atypical situations. Yet, these studies have important limitations, as they promote intuitive responses using weak time pressure or conceptual priming of intuition. Since these manipulations do not deplete participants’ ability to reason completely, it remains unclear whether cooperative heuristics are really automatic or they emerge after a small, but positive, amount of deliberation. Consistent with the latter hypothesis, we report two experiments demonstrating that spontaneous reactions in one-shot anonymous interactions tend to be egoistic. In doing so, our findings shed further light on the cognitive underpinnings of cooperation, as they suggest that cooperation in one-shot interactions is not automatic, but appears only at later stages of reasoning.

show abstract

Intuitive Cooperation and Punishment in the Field

Cited by 4 publications

References 24 publications

Deliberation Favours Social Efficiency by Making People Disregard Their Relative Shares: Evidence from US and India

Deliberation Favours Social Efficiency by Making People Disregard Their Relative Shares: Evidence from US and India

Time pressure and deliberation affect moral punishment

Rethinking spontaneous giving: Extreme time pressure and ego-depletion favor self-regarding reactions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About