Self-reported emotions correlate with but cannot prove punitive sanctioning
Evidence
For brevity, we do not report our questionnaire results (interested readers may consult Fehr & Fischbacher, 2004), but they are consistent with the view that emotions cause the sanctioning decisions that enforce social norms, because the pattern of third-party punishment and the emotional pattern fit together nicely. However, the results do not prove that emotions cause the sanctioning decisions. We are aware that self-reported or predicted emotions need to be treated with caution. It is possible that self-reported emotions deviate systematically from the emotions that subjects actually would experience if they were in a particular scenario. However, our questionnaire results suggest at least interesting hypotheses regarding the role of emotions in norm enforcement. — Ernst Fehr, Third-Party Punishment and Social Norms, 146
Categorization
- QUESTION: The authors concede self-reported emotions may not match experienced ones — worth chasing later what gap exists between predicted and actual punitive emotion.
- XREF: Relates to Dimmesdale’s hidden guilt: an unobserved transgression may provoke different felt emotions than a public one, bearing on whether emotion or image drives punishment. — connects to: Emotions like anger drive and independently cost norm enforcement — Ernst Fehr, Third-Party Punishment and Social Norms, 135