Punishment Despite Reasonable Doubt - A Public Goods Experiment with Sanctions Under Uncertainty

@article{Grechenig2010PunishmentDR,
  title={Punishment Despite Reasonable Doubt - A Public Goods Experiment with Sanctions Under Uncertainty},
  author={Kristoffel R. Grechenig and Andreas Nicklisch and Christian Thni},
  journal={Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal},
  year={2010}
}
Under a great variety of legally relevant circumstances, people have to decide whether or not to cooperate when they face an incentive to defect. The law sometimes provides people with sanctioning mechanisms to enforce pro-social behavior. Experimental evidence on voluntary public goods provision shows that the option to punish others substantially improves cooperation, even if punishment is costly. However, these studies focus on situations where there is no uncertainty about the behavior of… 

Trigger-Happy or Precisionist? On Demand for Monitoring in a Noisy Social Dilemma Game

Recent experimental studies question whether societies can selfgovern social dilemmas with the help of decentralized punishment opportunities. One important challenge for the mechanism is imperfect

The cost of noise: stochastic punishment falls short of sustaining cooperation in social dilemma experiments

TLDR
It is shown that stochastic punishment falls short of sustaining cooperation in the repeated public good game and causes a rise in antisocial punishment, a mutually harmful behavior previously associated with societies with a weak rule of law.

Implementing punishment and reward in the public goods game: the effect of individual and collective decision rules

Punishments and rewards are effective means for establishing cooperation in social dilemmas. We compare a setting where actors individually decide whom to sanction with a setting where sanctions are

Consensual punishment does not promote cooperation in the six-person prisoner's dilemma game with noisy public monitoring

TLDR
The more other group members have to agree on punishing a defector, the less likely will a co-operator be punished by mistake, and the conditions under which punishment institutions can promote cooperation if such cooperation is noisy are narrowed down.

Deterrence by Imperfect Sanctions – A Public Good Experiment

Sanctions are often so weak that a money maximizing individual would not be deterred. In this paper I show that they may nonetheless serve a forward looking purpose if sufficiently many individuals

Self-governance in noisy social dilemmas : Experimental evidence on punishment with costly monitoring

Recent experimental studies question whether societies can “selfgovernance” social dilemmas in a decentralized way. One important problem is are dencentralized punishment opportunities under

Assuring Adequate Deterrence in Tort: A Public Good Experiment

To explore damage rules’ deterrent effect, we use a public good experiment to tailor allowable punishment to rules used in actual civil litigation. The experimental treatments are analogous to: (1)

Laws and Norms: Experimental Evidence with Liability Rules

We conduct an experiment where participants choose between actions that provide private benefits but may also impose losses on others. Three legal environments are compared: no law, strict liability

Legitimate punishment, feedback, and the enforcement of cooperation

...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 84 REFERENCES

Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments

This paper provides evidence that free riders are heavily punished even if punishment is costly and does not provide any material benefits for the punisher. The more free riders negatively deviate

Punishment and Counter-punishment in Public Good Games: Can We Still Govern Ourselves?

In the public goods literature, there have been recently a number of experiments which demonstrate how the problem of the under-provision of a public good can be solved through mutual monitoring and

Can Judges Ignore Inadmissible Information? The Difficulty of Deliberately Disregarding

Due process requires courts to make decisions based on the evidence before them without regard to information outside of the record. Skepticism about the ability of jurors to ignore inadmissible

On Perverse and Second-Order Punishment in Public Goods Experiments with Decentralized Sanctioning

The fact that many people take it upon themselves to impose costly punishment on free riders helps to explain why collective action sometimes succeeds despite the prediction of received theory. But

Optimal criminal procedure: Fairness and deterrence

Optimal subsidies and damages in the presence of judicial error

How Should Punitive Damages Work?

What are punitive damages for? In a companion article,* I argued that states should re-conceive and restructure punitive damages to advance, in part, the public's interest in retributive justice. I

A Theory of Punitive Damages

A contemporary theory of punitive damages must answer two questions: (1) what place, if any, do punitive damages have in the civil law of tort, given that they appear to involve an idea of criminal

Does Wrongful Conviction Lower Deterrence

The traditional view is that wrongful conviction lowers deterrence by lowering a person’s payoff for being innocent without affecting the payoff for being guilty. However, this view fails to
...