Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Original Article

Punishment Reactions to Powerful Suspects

Comparing a “Corrupt” Versus a “Leniency” Approach of Power

Published Online:April 01, 2022https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000462

Abstract

Abstract. This study aimed to replicate the intuitive retributivism hypothesis, according to which people’s punitive sentiments are predominantly driven by retributive concerns. Contrary to prior research that focuses on how people punish offenders, this study investigated how people punish individuals suspected of immoralities. Moreover, we manipulated a suspect’s power level (high/low/undefined) and stated contrasting hypotheses (the “power corrupts” approach vs. the “power leniency” approach) regarding the impact of power on punishment motives. Finally, we investigated the mediating role of recidivism and guilt likelihood in these effects. The results replicated the intuitive retributivism hypothesis and revealed the robustness of this effect. Moreover, in line with the “power corrupts” approach, we found that the role of utilitarian (but not retributive or restorative) motives is stronger in the punishment of powerful suspects as opposed to powerless ones. Unexpectedly, neither guilt likelihood nor recidivism of a suspect mediated the effects of power on punishment motives.

References

  • Abalakina-Paap, M., Stephan, W. G., Craig, T., & Gregory, W. L. (1999). Beliefs in conspiracies. Political Psychology, 20(3), 637–647. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00160 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Abrams, D., Palmer, S. B., Rutland, A., Cameron, L., & Van de Vyver, J. (2014). Evaluations of and reasoning about normative and deviant ingroup and outgroup members: Development of the black sheep effect. Developmental Psychology, 50(1), 258–270. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032461 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Abrams, D., Randsley de Moura, G., Marques, J. M., & Hutchison, P. (2008). Innovation credit: When can leaders oppose their group’s norms? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 662–678. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.662 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Abrams, D., Travaglino, G. A., Marques, J. M., Pinto, I., & Levine, J. M. (2018). Deviance credit: Tolerance of deviant ingroup leaders is mediated by their accrual of prototypicality and conferral of their right to be supported. Journal of Social Issues, 74(1), 36–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.2018.74.issue-1/issuetoc First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. J. (2009). The pursuit of status in social groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 295–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01655.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bentham, J. (1789). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Clarendon Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198205166.book.1 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bartels, D. M. (2008). Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision making. Cognition, 108(2), 381–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Evil: Inside human violence and cruelty. Henry Holt. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Blader, S. L., & Chen, Y. R. (2012). Differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 994–1014. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026651 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Blader, S. L., & Yap, A. J. (2016). Power, dishonesty, and justice. In J.-W. Van ProoijenP. A. M. van LangeEds., Cheating, corruption, and concealment (pp. 208–229). Cambridge University Press. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Boles, T. L., Croson, R. T. A., & Murnighan, J. K. (2000). Deception and retribution in repeated ultimatum bargaining. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(2), 235–259. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2908 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. Academic Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Byrne, D., Clore, G. L., & Smeaton, G. (1986). The attraction hypothesis: Do similar attitudes affect anything? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1167–1170. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Carlsmith, K. M. (2008). On justifying punishment: The discrepancy between words and actions. Social Justice Research, 21(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0068-x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Carlsmith, K. M., & Darley, J. M. (2008). Psychological aspects of retributive justice. In M. P. ZannaEd., Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 40) (pp. 193–236). Elsevier. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.284 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Carney, D. R., & Mason, M. F. (2010). Decision making and testosterone: When the ends justify the means. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(4), 668–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.02.003 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(3), 366–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.34.3.366 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Conway, P., & Gawronski, B. (2013). Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision-making: A process dissociation approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(2), 216–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031021 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Dahl, R. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2(3), 201–215. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Darley, J. M. (2002). Just punishments: Research on retributional justice. In M. RossD. T. MillerEds., The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 314–333). Cambridge University Press. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Darley, J. M., & Pittman, T. S. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 324–336. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0704_05 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Davis, J. H., Bray, R. M., & Holt, R. W. (1977). The empirical study of decision processes in juries: A critical review. In J. L. TappF. J. LevineEds., Law, justice and the individual in society: Psychological and legal issues (pp. 326–361). Holt, Rinehart & Winston. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • De Beaumont, G., & Tocqueville, A. (1833). On the penitentiary system in the United States and its application in France (F. Lieber, Trans.). Carey, Lea and Blanchard. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089716 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fast, N. J., Halevy, N., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). The destructive nature of power without status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 391–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.07.013 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48(6), 621–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.6.621 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fleischmann, A., Lammers, J., Conway, P., & Galinsky, A. D. (2019). Paradoxical effects of power on moral thinking: Why power both increases and decreases deontological and utilitarian moral decisions. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 10(1), 190–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X03022002003 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Fousiani, K., & Demoulin, S. (2019). The effects of group membership and perceived humanness of victims on motives for punishment and justice decisions. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 16(2), 224–244. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Fousiani, K., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2019). Reactions to offenders: Psychological differences between beliefs versus punishment. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(4), 894–916. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12320 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fousiani, K., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2021). Supplemental materials to “Punishment reactions to powerful suspects: Comparing a ‘corrupt’ versus a ‘leniency’ approach of power” https://dx.doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4954 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Fousiani, K., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (in press). Motives for punishing powerful versus prestigious offenders: The moderating role of group identity. British Journal of Social Psychology. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Fousiani, K., Yzerbyt, V., Kteily, N. S., & Demoulin, S. (2019). Justice reactions to deviant ingroup members: Ingroup identity threat motivates utilitarian punishments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12312 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fragale, A. R., Rosen, B., Xu, C., & Merideth, I. (2009). The higher they are, the harder they fall: The effects of wrongdoer status on observer punishment recommendations and intentionality attributions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.05.002 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Goldberg, J. H., Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Rage and reason: The psychology of the intuitive prosecutor. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(5–6), 781–795. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199908/09)29:5/6<781:AID-EJSP960>3.0.CO;2-3 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gruenfeld, D. H., Inesi, M. E., Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.111 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hampden-Turner, C., & Trompenaars, F. (2000). Building cross-cultural competence: How to create wealth from conflicting cultures. Yale University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Methodology in the social sciences. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. A regression-based approach. Guilford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (rev. 3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hoyt, C. L., Price, T. L., & Poatsy, L. (2013). The social role theory of unethical leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(5), 712–723. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kant, I. (1797/1991). The metaphysics of morals. In H. ReissEd.. Kant: Political writings (H. B. Nisbet (Trans.). First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Karelaia, N., & Keck, S. (2013). When deviant leaders are punished more than non-leaders: The role of deviance severity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(1), 783–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.04.003 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad Leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Harvard Business School Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Kerr, N. L., Hymes, R. W., Anderson, A. B., & Weathers, J. E. (1995). Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 19(6), 545–567. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kipnis, D. (1972). Does power corrupt? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033390 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lammers, J., Stapel, D. A., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). Power increases hypocrisy: Moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior. Psychological Science, 21(5), 737–744. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610368810 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy the self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520802211628 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Nagin, D. S. (1998). Criminal deterrence research at the outset of the twenty-first century. In M. TonryEd., Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 23) (pp. 1–42). University of Chicago Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Keltner, D. (2012). Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(11), 4086–4091. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118373109 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Pitesa, M., & Thau, S. (2013). Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(3), 550–558. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031697 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Reicher, S., Haslam, S. A., & Rath, R. (2008). Making a virtue of evil: A five-step social identity model of the development of collective hate. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(3), 1313–1344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00113.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Saleilles, R. (1898). L’individualisation de la peine [The individualization of pain]. Etude de Criminalité Sociale. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Schaerer, M., du Plessis, C., Yap, A. J., & Thau, S. (2018). Low power individuals in social power research: A quantitative review, theoretical framework, and empirical test. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 149, 73–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.08.004 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Smeaton, G., Byrne, D., & Murnen, S. K. (1989). The repulsion hypothesis revisited: Similarity irrelevance, dissimilarity bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 54–59. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2006). Retributive reactions to suspected offenders: The importance of social categorizations and guilt probability. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(6), 715–726. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205284964 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2018). The moral punishment instinct. Oxford University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Weber, M. (1946). Bureaucracy. In H. GerthC. W. MillsEds., Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 490). Oxford University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wenzel, M., & Thielmann, I. (2006). Why we punish in the name of justice: Just desert versus value restoration and the role of social identity. Social Justice Research, 19(4), 450–470). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-006-0028-2 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wiltermuth, S. S., & Flynn, F. J. (2013). Power, moral clarity, and punishment in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 1002–1023. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0960 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zehr, H. (1997). Restorative justice: The concept. Corrections Today, 59(7), 68–70. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar