The insured victim effect : when and why compensating harm decreases punishment recommendations

P.P.F.M. Calseyde, van de, G.B. Keren, M. Zeelenberg

Onderzoeksoutput: Bijdrage aan tijdschriftTijdschriftartikelAcademicpeer review

5 Citaties (Scopus)

Uittreksel

An insurance policy may not only affect the consequences for victims but also for perpetrators. In six experiments we find that people recommend milder punishments for perpetrators when the victim was insured, although people believe that a sentence should not depend on the victim's insurance status. The robustness of this effect is demonstrated by showing that recommendations can even be more lenient for crimes that are in fact more serious but in which the victim was insured. Moreover, even when harm was possible but did not materialize, people still prefer to punish crimes less severely when the (potential) victim was insured. The final two experiments suggest that the effect is associated with a change in (1) compassion for the victim and (2) perceived severity of the transgression. Implications of this phenomenon are briefly discussed
TaalEngels
Pagina's161-173
Aantal pagina's13
TijdschriftJudgment and Decision Making
Volume8
Nummer van het tijdschrift2
StatusGepubliceerd - 2013
Extern gepubliceerdJa

Vingerafdruk

Punishment
Crime
Insurance Coverage
Insurance

Citeer dit

@article{dc6088b29d5147dd83ff467a6077cfcf,
title = "The insured victim effect : when and why compensating harm decreases punishment recommendations",
abstract = "An insurance policy may not only affect the consequences for victims but also for perpetrators. In six experiments we find that people recommend milder punishments for perpetrators when the victim was insured, although people believe that a sentence should not depend on the victim's insurance status. The robustness of this effect is demonstrated by showing that recommendations can even be more lenient for crimes that are in fact more serious but in which the victim was insured. Moreover, even when harm was possible but did not materialize, people still prefer to punish crimes less severely when the (potential) victim was insured. The final two experiments suggest that the effect is associated with a change in (1) compassion for the victim and (2) perceived severity of the transgression. Implications of this phenomenon are briefly discussed",
author = "{Calseyde, van de}, P.P.F.M. and G.B. Keren and M. Zeelenberg",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "161--173",
journal = "Judgment and Decision Making",
issn = "1930-2975",
publisher = "Society for Judgment and Decision Making",
number = "2",

}

The insured victim effect : when and why compensating harm decreases punishment recommendations. / Calseyde, van de, P.P.F.M.; Keren, G.B.; Zeelenberg, M.

In: Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 8, Nr. 2, 2013, blz. 161-173.

Onderzoeksoutput: Bijdrage aan tijdschriftTijdschriftartikelAcademicpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The insured victim effect : when and why compensating harm decreases punishment recommendations

AU - Calseyde, van de,P.P.F.M.

AU - Keren,G.B.

AU - Zeelenberg,M.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - An insurance policy may not only affect the consequences for victims but also for perpetrators. In six experiments we find that people recommend milder punishments for perpetrators when the victim was insured, although people believe that a sentence should not depend on the victim's insurance status. The robustness of this effect is demonstrated by showing that recommendations can even be more lenient for crimes that are in fact more serious but in which the victim was insured. Moreover, even when harm was possible but did not materialize, people still prefer to punish crimes less severely when the (potential) victim was insured. The final two experiments suggest that the effect is associated with a change in (1) compassion for the victim and (2) perceived severity of the transgression. Implications of this phenomenon are briefly discussed

AB - An insurance policy may not only affect the consequences for victims but also for perpetrators. In six experiments we find that people recommend milder punishments for perpetrators when the victim was insured, although people believe that a sentence should not depend on the victim's insurance status. The robustness of this effect is demonstrated by showing that recommendations can even be more lenient for crimes that are in fact more serious but in which the victim was insured. Moreover, even when harm was possible but did not materialize, people still prefer to punish crimes less severely when the (potential) victim was insured. The final two experiments suggest that the effect is associated with a change in (1) compassion for the victim and (2) perceived severity of the transgression. Implications of this phenomenon are briefly discussed

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 161

EP - 173

JO - Judgment and Decision Making

T2 - Judgment and Decision Making

JF - Judgment and Decision Making

SN - 1930-2975

IS - 2

ER -