In both narrative theory and evolutionary psychology, equitable-retribution—or the idea that punishments for committing a moral transgression should be equivalent to the transgression itself—is a centerpiece of discussion. This article reports results from a blocked within-subjects experiment that examined speed of cognitive processing and subjective rating of three types of narrative retribution: equitable-retribution; under-retribution, where punishment is absent for a transgression; and over-retribution, where punishment exceeds the severity of the transgression. Results suggest that narrative endings depicting equitable-retribution are processed more quickly and liked more than endings with under-retribution and over-retribution. In addition, liking seems to correspond with enjoyment for equitable-retribution and over-retribution; for under-retribution, liking seems to correspond with appreciation. Discussion focuses on implications for theory and extending the current experimental paradigm.
BartschA.HartmannT. (2017). The role of cognitive and affective challenge in entertainment experience. Communication Research, 44, 29-53. doi:10.1177/0093650214565921
3.
BartschA.OliverM. B. (2017). Appreciation of meaningful entertainment experiences and eudaimonic well-being. In ReineckeL.OliverM. B. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of media use and well-being (pp. 80-92). New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315714752
4.
BartschA.SchneiderF. M. (2014). Entertainment and politics revisited: How non-escapist forms of entertainment can stimulate political interest and information seeking. Journal of Communication, 64, 369-396. doi:10.1111/jcom.12095
5.
BaumardN. (2010). Has punishment played a role in the evolution of cooperation? A critical review. Mind & Society, 9, 171-192. doi:10.1007/s11299-010-0079-9
6.
BaumardN.BoyerP. (2013). Religious beliefs as reflective elaborations on intuitions: A modified dual-process model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 295-300. doi:10.1177/0963721413478610
7.
CarverR. P. (1992). Reading rate: Theory, research, and practical implications. Journal of Reading, 36, 84-95.
8.
EvansJ. S. B. T.StanovichK. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 223-241. doi:10.1177/1745691612460685
9.
FehrE.FischbacherU.GächterS. (2002). Strong reciprocity, human cooperation, and the enforcement of social norms. Human Nature, 13, 1-25. doi:10.1007/s12110-002-1012-7
10.
FehrE.GächterS. (2000). Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, 159-181. doi:10.1257/jep.14.3.159
11.
GrizzardM.HuangC.FitzgeraldK.AhnC.ChuH. (2017). Sensing heroes and villains: Character-schema and the disposition formation process. Communication Research, 45, 479-501. doi:10.1177/0093650217699934
LernerM. J. (1980). Belief in a just world—A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
14.
LernerM. J.ClaytonS. (2011). Justice and self-interest: Two fundamental motives. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
15.
LewisR. J.TamboriniR.WeberR. (2014). Testing a dual-process model of media enjoyment and appreciation. Journal of Communication, 64, 397-416. doi:10.1111/jcom.12101
16.
MikulaG. (1986). The experience of injustice: Toward a better understanding of its phenomenology. In BierhoffH. W.CohenR. L.GreenbergJ. (Eds.), Justice in social relations (pp. 103-123). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
17.
MikulaG. (1994). Perspective-related differences in interpretations of injustice by victims and victimizers. In LernerM. J.MikulaG. (Eds.), Entitlement and the affectional bond: Critical issues in social justice (pp. 175-203). Boston, MA: Springer.
18.
MikulaG.SchererK. R.AthenstaedtU. (1998). The role of injustice in the elicitation of differential emotional reactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 769-783. doi:10.1177/0146167298247009
19.
MontadaL. (1998). Belief in a just world: A hybrid of justice motive and self-interest? In MontadaL.LernerM. J. (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 217-246). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
20.
O’BrienF.CousineauD. (2014). Representing error bars in within-subject designs in typical software packages. Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 10, 56-67. doi:10.20982/tqmp.10.1.p056
21.
OliverM. B. (2008). Tender affective states as predictors of entertainment preference. Journal of Communication, 58, 40-61. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00373.x
22.
OliverM. B.BartschA. (2010). Appreciation as audience response: Exploring entertainment gratifications beyond hedonism. Human Communication Research, 36, 53-81. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01368.x
23.
PleskacT. J.BusemeyerJ. R. (2010). Two-stage dynamic signal detection: A theory of choice, decision time, and confidence. Psychological Review, 117, 864-901. doi:10.1037/a0019737
24.
RaiT. S.FiskeA. P. (2011). Moral psychology is relationship regulation: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychological Review, 118, 57-75. doi:10.1037/a0021867
25.
RaneyA. A. (2002). Moral judgment as a predictor of enjoyment of crime drama. Media Psychology, 4, 305-322. doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0404_01
26.
RaneyA. A. (2004). Expanding disposition theory: Reconsidering character liking, moral evaluations, and enjoyment. Communication Theory, 14, 348-369. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00319.x
27.
RaneyA. A. (2005). Punishing media criminals and moral judgment: The impact on enjoyment. Media Psychology, 7, 145-163. doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0702_2
28.
RaneyA. A.BryantJ. (2002). Moral judgment and crime drama: An integrated theory of enjoyment. Journal of Communication, 52, 402-415. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02552.x
29.
RothmundT.GollwitzerM.BaumertA.SchmittM. (2013). The psychological functions of justice in mass media. In TamboriniR. (Ed.), Media and the moral mind (pp. 170-197). New York, NY: Routledge.
30.
RyeM. S.PargamentK. I.AliM. A.BeckG. L.DorffE. N.HalliseyV. N.. . . WillaimsJ. G. (1999). Religious perspectives on forgiveness. In McCulloughM. E.PargamentK. I.ThoresenC. E. (Eds.), Forgiveness: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 17-40). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
31.
SkitkaL. J.WinquistJ.HutchinsonS. (2003). Are outcome fairness and outcome favorability distinguishable psychological constructs? A meta-analytic review. Social Justice Research, 16, 309-341. doi:10.1023/A:1026336131206
32.
SlaterM. D.JohnsonB. K.CohenJ.ComelloM. L. G.EwoldsenD. R. (2014). Temporarily expanding the boundaries of the self: Motivations for entering the story world and implications for narrative effects. Journal of Communication, 64, 439-455. doi:10.1111/jcom.12100
33.
SmithP. L. (2000). Stochastic dynamic models of response time and accuracy: A foundational primer. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 408-463. doi:10.1006/jmps.1999.1260
34.
TamboriniR. (2011). Moral intuition and media entertainment. Journal of Media Psychology, 23, 39-45. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000031
35.
TamboriniR. (2013). A model of intuitive morality and exemplars. In TamboriniR. (Ed.), Media and the moral mind (pp. 43-74). London, England: Routledge.
36.
TamboriniR.EdenA.BowmanN. D.GrizzardM.LachlanK. A. (2012). The influence of morality subcultures on the acceptance and appeal of violence. Journal of Communication, 62, 136-157. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01620.x
37.
TamboriniR.GrizzardM. N.BowmanN.ReineckeL.LewisR. J.EdenA. (2011). Media enjoyment as needs satisfaction: The contribution of hedonic and non-hedonic needs. Journal of Communication, 6, 1025-1042. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01593.x
38.
TamboriniR.LachlanK. (2003, November). Justifying violence: The impact of disposition and motive on the acceptability of violent reprisal. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association, Miami Beach, FL.
39.
van den BosK.LindE. A.VermuntR.WilkeH. A. M. (1997). How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others? The psychology of the fair process effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1034-1046. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.1034
40.
VordererP.KlimmtC.RitterfeldU. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication Theory, 14, 388-408. doi:10.1093/ct/14.4.388
41.
VordererP.RitterfeldU. (2009). Digital games. In NabiR.OliverM. B. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (pp. 455-468). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42.
WeberR.EdenA.MathiakK. (2011, June). Seeing bad people punished makes us think alike: Social norm violations in television drama elicit cortical synchronization in viewers. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Boston, MA.
43.
WeissH. M.SuckowK.CropanzanoR. (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 786-794. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.84.5.786
44.
ZillmannD. (1991). Empathy: Affect from bearing witness to the emotion of others. In BryantJ.ZillmannD. (Eds.), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes (pp. 135-168). Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum.
45.
ZillmannD. (1998). The psychology of the appeal of portrayals of violence. In GoldsteinJ. H. (Ed.), Why we watch: The attractions of violent entertainment (pp. 179-211). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
46.
ZillmannD. (2000). Basal morality in drama appreciation. In BondebjergI. (Ed.), Moving images, culture and the mind (pp. 53-63). Luton, UK: University of Luton Press.
47.
ZillmannD.BryantJ. (1975). Viewer’s moral sanction of retribution in the appreciation of dramatic presentations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 572-582. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(75)90008-6
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
