Literature DB >> 14650389

The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice.

John M Darley1, Thane S Pittman.   

Abstract

How do observers respond when the actions of one individual inflict harm on another? The primary reaction to carelessly inflicted harm is to seek restitution; the offender is judged to owe compensation to the harmed individual. The primary reaction to harm inflicted intentionally is moral outrage producing a desire for retribution; the harm-doer must be punished. Reckless conduct, an intermediate case, provokes reactions that involve elements of both careless and intentional harm. The moral outrage felt by those who witness transgressions is a product of both cognitive interpretations of the event and emotional reactions to it. Theory about the exact nature of the emotional reactions is considered, along with suggestions for directions for future research.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14650389     DOI: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0704_05

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Rev        ISSN: 1532-7957


  34 in total

1.  Subcomponents of psychopathy have opposing correlations with punishment judgments.

Authors:  Jana Schaich Borg; Rachel E Kahn; Walter Sinnott-Armstrong; Robert Kurzban; Paul H Robinson; Kent A Kiehl
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2013-07-08

2.  An fMRI investigation of the effects of belief in free will on third-party punishment.

Authors:  Frank Krueger; Morris Hoffman; Henrik Walter; Jordan Grafman
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  Free will beliefs predict attitudes toward unethical behavior and criminal punishment.

Authors:  Nathan D Martin; Davide Rigoni; Kathleen D Vohs
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Corticolimbic gating of emotion-driven punishment.

Authors:  Michael T Treadway; Joshua W Buckholtz; Justin W Martin; Katharine Jan; Christopher L Asplund; Matthew R Ginther; Owen D Jones; René Marois
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2014-08-03       Impact factor: 24.884

5.  Scaling up psychology via Scientific Regret Minimization.

Authors:  Mayank Agrawal; Joshua C Peterson; Thomas L Griffiths
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-04-02       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  To punish or repair? Evolutionary psychology and lay intuitions about modern criminal justice.

Authors:  Michael Bang Petersen; Aaron Sell; John Tooby; Leda Cosmides
Journal:  Evol Hum Behav       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.178

7.  Defeasible reasoning with legal conditionals.

Authors:  Lupita Estefania Gazzo Castañeda; Markus Knauff
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-04

8.  Perceived intent motivates people to magnify observed harms.

Authors:  Daniel L Ames; Susan T Fiske
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Intentional harms are worse, even when they're not.

Authors:  Daniel L Ames; Susan T Fiske
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-07-22

10.  A Millennial Challenge: Extremism in Uncertain Times.

Authors:  Susan T Fiske
Journal:  J Soc Issues       Date:  2013-09-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.