Why do victims sometimes not receive the help they need? One reason may be that people believe punishing perpetrators restores justice, which makes them less willing to help victims if the perpetrator has been punished. Participants who were first asked how much to punish a perpetrator subsequently recommended less compensation for the victim relative to participants who were asked about compensation first. In contrast, participants punished perpetrators to the same degree regardless of whether they were first asked about compensation (Study 1). These effects also held when a third party administered the initial response (Studies 2 and 3). Punishment increased people’s belief that justice had been restored, which decreased their desires for victim compensation (Study 3). Thus, the extent to which individuals are concerned about victims is influenced by whether they first consider perpetrator punishment.
AdamsG. S.MullenE. (2013). Increased voting for candidates who compensate victims rather than punish offenders. Social Justice Research, 26, 1–25.
2.
BaronJ.RitovI. (1993). Intuitions about penalties and compensation in the context of tort law. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7, 17–33.
3.
CarlsmithK.DarleyJ. M. (2008). Psychological aspects of retributive justice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 193–236.
4.
CarlsmithK. M. (2006). The roles of retribution and utility in determining punishment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 437–451.
5.
CarlsmithK. M.DarleyJ. M.RobinsonP. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284–299.
6.
DarleyJ. M.PittmanT. S. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Psychological Review, 7, 324–336.
GoldbergJ. H.LernerJ. S.TetlockP. E. (1999). Rage and reason: The psychology of the intuitive prosecutor. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 781–795.
9.
GollwitzerM.DenzlerM. (2009). What makes revenge sweet: Seeing the offender suffer or delivering a message?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 840–844.
10.
GrahamS.WeinerB.ZuckerG. S. (1997). An attributional analysis of punishment goals and public reactions to O.J. Simpson. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 331–346.
11.
GrometD.DarleyJ. M. (2006). Restoration and retribution: How including retributive components affects the acceptability of restorative justice procedures. Social Justice Research, 19, 395–432.
12.
GrometD. M.OkimotoT. G.WenzelM.DarleyJ. M. (2012). A victim-centered approach to justice? Victim satisfaction effects on third-party punishments. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 375–389. doi:10.1037/h0093922
13.
HaferC. L.BègueL. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128–167.
14.
JenniK. E.LoewensteinG. (1997). Explaining the “Identifiable Victim Effect.”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 235–257.
15.
KurzbanR.DeScioliP.O’BrienE. (2007). Audience effects on moralistic punishment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 75–84.
16.
LernerM. J. (1970). The desire for justice and reactions to victims. In MacaulayJ.BerkowitzL. (Eds.), Altruism and helping behavior (pp. 205–229). New York, NY: Academic Press.
17.
LernerM. J. (2003). The justice motive: Where social psychologists found it, where they lost it, and why they may never find it again. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 388–399.
18.
LernerM. J.MillerD. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030–1051.
19.
LotzS.OkimotoT. G.SchlösserT.FetchenhauerD. (2011). Punitive versus compensatory reactions to injustice: Emotional antecedents to third-party interventions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 477–480.
20.
MillerD. T. (2001). Disrespect and the psychology of injustice. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 527–553.
21.
MillerD. T.McCannC. D. (1979). Children’s reactions to the perpetrators and victims of injustices. Child Development, 50, 861–868.
22.
MullenE.OkimotoT. (in press). Compensatory justice. In AmbroseM.CropanzanoR. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of justice in work organizations. Oxford University Press.
23.
NewheiserA.SawaokaT.DovidioJ. F. (2012). Why do we punish groups? High entitativity promotes moral suspicion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 481, 931–936.
24.
Office for Victims of Crime. (2012). Office of justice programs, U.S. department of justice. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/
25.
Office of Victim Services. (2012). New York state office of victim services. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ovs.ny.gov
26.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717–732.
StrelanP.Van ProoijenJ. W. (2013). Retribution and forgiveness: The healing effects of punishing for just deserts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 544–553. doi:10.1002/ejsp.1964
29.
TetlockP. E. (2002). Social-functionalist metaphors for judgment and choice: The intuitive politician, theologian, and prosecutor. Psychological Review, 109, 451–472.
30.
TetlockP. E.VisserP. S.SinghR.PolifroniM.ScottA.ElsonS. B.RescoberP. (2007). People as intuitive prosecutors: The impact of social-control goals on attributions of responsibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 195–209.
31.
TrippT. M.BiesR. J.AquinoK. (2007). A vigilante model of justice: Revenge, reconciliation, and forgiveness. Social Justice Research, 19, 10–34.
32.
van de CalseydeP. P. F. M.KerenG.ZeelenbergM. (2013). The insured victim effect: When and why compensating harm decreases punishment recommendations. Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 161–173.
33.
van ProoijenJ. W. (2010). Retributive versus compensatory justice: Observers’ preference for punishing in response to criminal offenses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 72–85.
34.
VidmarN.MillerD. T. (1980). Social psychological processes underlying attitudes toward legal punishment. Law and Society Review, 14, 565–602.
35.
WenzelM.ThielmannI. (2006). Why we punish in the name of justice: Just desert versus value restoration and the role of social identity. Social Justice Research, 19, 450–470.
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.
