野外的制裁:美食中的理性演算和报复本能

Giada Di Stefano, Andrew A. King, Gianmario Verona
{"title":"野外的制裁:美食中的理性演算和报复本能","authors":"Giada Di Stefano, Andrew A. King, Gianmario Verona","doi":"10.5465/AMJ.2012.1192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Why do we sanction norm violations? Despite near universal agreement on the role of sanctions for maintaining norms of cooperation, scholars hotly dispute whether individuals sanction based on a rational calculus or because of strong retributive instincts. In this paper we report on a mixed-method field study examining sanctioning behavior. Our goal is to extend theories of sanctioning by evaluating the conditions under which individuals are more likely to administer a sanction in response to a norm violation. To guide the development of our hypotheses, we engage in a qualitative examination of sanctioning decisions in the context of gourmet cuisine. We then test our predictions in a field experiment involving more than 500 gourmet chefs in Italy. Our results suggest that individuals follow retributive instincts, but they also engage in cost/benefit calculations. Indeed, we find that the two logics of sanctioning jointly influence participation in social exchange. Recognizing their own tendency to sanction at a cost, individuals avoid circumstances that could trigger the need for costly sanctions.","PeriodicalId":172039,"journal":{"name":"Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth Research Paper Series","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"37","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sanctioning in the Wild: Rational Calculus and Retributive Instincts in Gourmet Cuisine\",\"authors\":\"Giada Di Stefano, Andrew A. King, Gianmario Verona\",\"doi\":\"10.5465/AMJ.2012.1192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Why do we sanction norm violations? Despite near universal agreement on the role of sanctions for maintaining norms of cooperation, scholars hotly dispute whether individuals sanction based on a rational calculus or because of strong retributive instincts. In this paper we report on a mixed-method field study examining sanctioning behavior. Our goal is to extend theories of sanctioning by evaluating the conditions under which individuals are more likely to administer a sanction in response to a norm violation. To guide the development of our hypotheses, we engage in a qualitative examination of sanctioning decisions in the context of gourmet cuisine. We then test our predictions in a field experiment involving more than 500 gourmet chefs in Italy. Our results suggest that individuals follow retributive instincts, but they also engage in cost/benefit calculations. Indeed, we find that the two logics of sanctioning jointly influence participation in social exchange. Recognizing their own tendency to sanction at a cost, individuals avoid circumstances that could trigger the need for costly sanctions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":172039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"37\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2012.1192\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2012.1192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

摘要

我们为什么要制裁违反规范的行为?尽管制裁在维持合作规范方面的作用几乎得到了普遍认可,但学者们对个人制裁是基于理性计算还是出于强烈的报复本能展开了激烈的争论。在本文中,我们报告了一项混合方法的实地研究,研究制裁行为。我们的目标是通过评估个人更有可能对违反规范的行为实施制裁的条件来扩展制裁理论。为了指导我们假设的发展,我们在美食的背景下对制裁决策进行定性检查。然后,我们在意大利500多名美食厨师的现场实验中测试了我们的预测。我们的研究结果表明,个体遵循报复本能,但他们也会进行成本/收益计算。事实上,我们发现制裁的两种逻辑共同影响社会交换的参与。个人认识到他们自己倾向于付出代价进行制裁,因此避免可能引发需要进行代价高昂的制裁的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sanctioning in the Wild: Rational Calculus and Retributive Instincts in Gourmet Cuisine
Why do we sanction norm violations? Despite near universal agreement on the role of sanctions for maintaining norms of cooperation, scholars hotly dispute whether individuals sanction based on a rational calculus or because of strong retributive instincts. In this paper we report on a mixed-method field study examining sanctioning behavior. Our goal is to extend theories of sanctioning by evaluating the conditions under which individuals are more likely to administer a sanction in response to a norm violation. To guide the development of our hypotheses, we engage in a qualitative examination of sanctioning decisions in the context of gourmet cuisine. We then test our predictions in a field experiment involving more than 500 gourmet chefs in Italy. Our results suggest that individuals follow retributive instincts, but they also engage in cost/benefit calculations. Indeed, we find that the two logics of sanctioning jointly influence participation in social exchange. Recognizing their own tendency to sanction at a cost, individuals avoid circumstances that could trigger the need for costly sanctions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信