Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Retributive Justice

  • Chapter
Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research

Abstract

In this contribution, we review research on the psychology of retributive justice, the subjectively appropriate punishment of individuals or groups who have committed a transgression. We discuss possible evolutionary origins of retributive justice, move on to more reflective philosophies of punishment prevalent in societal discourse, and discuss psychological underpinnings of individuals’ adoption of particular philosophies or goals of punishment. We then focus on how exactly punishment as a response to wrongdoing (i.e., retribution) may satisfy a psychological justice motive. We highlight the communicative function of retribution and its ability to address symbolic threats or concerns that derive from a wrongdoing. Finally, we will argue that while retribution may be sought to alleviate various concerns and to repair justice, its capacity to do so as well as individuals’ choices of punishment for these purposes can only be adequately understood if non-punitive alternatives are considered. We call for an integrated understanding of justice responses that recognizes the fluid and multifaceted nature of justice repair.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, G. S., & Mullen, E. (2013). Increased voting for candidates who compensate victims rather than punish offenders. Social Justice Research, 26, 168–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed, A., II, Lim, V. K. G., & Felps, W. (2009). Testing a social cognitive model of moral behavior: The interaction of situational factors and moral identity centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 123–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., & Reed, A., II. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1423–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, W. (1979). The concept of desert and its influence on simulated decision makers’ sentencing decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 163–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, W., Walster, E., & Utne, M. K. (1976). Equity and the law: The effect of a harmdoer’s “suffering in the act” on liking and assigned punishment. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9). New York, NY: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, J. (1962). Principles of penal law. In J. Bowring (Ed.), The works of Jeremy Bentham. New York, NY: Russell & Russell (Original work published 1843).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1996). Beyond distrust: “getting even” and the need for revenge. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 246–260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, J., & Lane, R. C. (2002). The dynamics and dangers of entitlement. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 19, 739–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative justice and responsive regulation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, T. (2012). Punishment. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan, S. F. (2012). Introduction to “justice in animals”. Social Justice Research, 25, 109–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan, S. F., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2003). Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature, 425, 297–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bushman, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct and displaced aggression: Does self-love or self-hate lead to violence? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 219–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callan, M. J., Ellard, J. H., & Nicol, J. E. (2006). The belief in a just world and immanent justice reasoning in adults. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1646–1658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments on strategic interaction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K. M. (2006). The roles of retribution and utility in determining punishment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 437–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K. M. (2008). On justifying punishment: The discrepancy between words and actions. Social Justice Research, 21, 119–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K. M., & Darley, J. M. (2008). Psychological aspects of retributive justice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 193–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K. M., & Sood, A. M. (2009). The fine line between interrogation and retribution. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 191–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K. M., Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2008). The paradoxical consequences of revenge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1316–1324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. S., Perkowitz, W. T., Lurigio, A. J., & Weaver, F. M. (1987). Sentencing goals, causal attributions, ideology, and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christie, N. (1977). Conflicts as property. British Journal of Criminology, 17, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock, T. H., & Parker, G. A. (1995). Punishment in animal societies. Nature, 373, 209–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R. L. (2016). Restorative justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 257–272). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cottingham, J. (1979). Varieties of retribution. Philosophical Quarterly, 29, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., Fisher, B., & Applegate, B. K. (2000). Public opinion about punishment and corrections. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 27, pp. 1–79). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J. M., Carlsmith, K. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2000). Incapacitation and just deserts as motives for punishment. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 659–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J. M., & Gromet, D. M. (2010). The psychology of punishment: Intuition and reason, retribution and restoration. In D. R. Bobocel, A. C. Kay, M. P. Zanna, & J. M. Olson (Eds.), The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 11, pp. 229–249). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J. M., & Pittman, T. S. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 324–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Castella, K. C., Platow, M. J., Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., & Feather, N. T. (2011). Retribution or restoration? Anglo-Australian’s views towards domestic violence involving Muslim and Anglo-Australian victims and offenders. Psychology Crime and Law, 17, 403–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Keijser, J. W., van der Leeden, R., & Jackson, J. L. (2002). From moral theory to penal attitudes and back: A theoretically integrated modeling approach. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20, 317–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Quervain, D. J.-F., Fischbacher, U., Treyer, V., Schellhammer, M., Schnyder, U., Buck, A., et al. (2004). The neural basis of altruistic punishment. Science, 305, 1254–1258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duff, R. A. (2001). Punishment, communication, and community. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumas, A. (1844). The Count of Monte Cristo. Barnes & Noble Books, New York. (Reprinted 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. (1964). The division of labor in society (G. Simpson, Trans.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press. (Original work published 1902).

    Google Scholar 

  • Exline, J. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Expressing forgiveness and repentance: Benefits and barriers. In M. E. McCullough, K. I. Pargament, & C. E. Thoresen (Eds.), Forgiveness: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 133–155). New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Exline, J. J., Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., Campbell, W. K., & Finkel, E. J. (2004). To proud to let go: Narcissistic entitlement as a barrier to forgiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 894–912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Exline, J. J., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Hill, P., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Forgiveness and justice: A research agenda for social and personality psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 337–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. T. (1996). Reactions to penalties for an offense in relation to authoritarianism, values, perceived responsibility, perceived seriousness, and deservingness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 571–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. T. (1998). Reactions to penalties for offenses committed by the police and public citizens: Testing a social-cognitive process model of retributive justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 528–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. T. (1999). Values, achievement, and justice: Studies in the psychology of deservingness. New York, NY: Kluwer/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. T., Boeckmann, R. J., & McKee, I. R. (2001). Reactions to an offence in relation to authoritarianism, knowledge about risk, and freedom of action. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 109–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. T., & Souter, J. (2002). Reactions to mandatory sentences in relation to the ethnic identity and criminal history of the offender. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 417–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N., Wenzel, M., & McKee, I. (2013). Integrating multiple perspectives on schadenfreude: The role of deservingness and emotions. Motivation and Emotion, 37, 574–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003). The nature of human altruism. Nature, 425, 785–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2004). Third-party punishment and social norms. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 63–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., Cropanzano, R., & Goldman, B. (2005). What is the relationship between justice and morality? In J. Greenberg & J. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 215–245). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortune, C. A., Ward, T., & Willis, G. M. (2012). The rehabilitation of offenders: Reducing risk and promoting better lives. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19, 646–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funk, F., McGeer, V., & Gollwitzer, M. (2014). Get the message: Punishment is satisfying if the transgressor responds to its communicative intent. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. doi:10.1177/0146167214533130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, M. M., & Jackson, J. (2013). Retribution as revenge and retribution as just deserts. Social Justice Research, 26, 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, H., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., & Fehr, E. (2005). Moral sentiments and material interests: The foundations of cooperation in economic life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M. (2009). Justice and revenge. In M. E. Oswald, S. Bieneck, & J. Hupfeld-Heinemann (Eds.), Social psychology of punishment of crime (pp. 137–156). New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Bücklein, K. (2007). Are “we” more punitive than “me”? Self-construal styles, justice-related attitudes, and punitive judgments. Social Justice Research, 20, 457–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Bushman, B. J. (2012). Do victims of injustice punish to improve their mood? Social Psychology and Personality Science, 3, 572–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Denzler, M. (2009). What makes revenge so sweet: Seeing the offender suffer or delivering a message? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 840–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Keller, L. (2010). What you did only matters if you are one of us: Offenders’ group membership moderates the effect of criminal history on punishment severity. Social Psychology, 41, 20–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., Meder, M., & Schmitt, M. (2011). What gives victims satisfaction when they seek revenge? European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 364–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1997). The steal motive: Managing the social determinants of employee theft. In R. A. G. J. Greenberg (Ed.), Antisocial behavior in organizations (pp. 85–108). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gromet, D. M., & Darley, J. M. (2006). Restoration and retribution: How including retributive components affects the acceptability of restorative justice procedures. Social Justice Research, 19, 395–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gromet, D. M., & Darley, J. M. (2009). Punishment and beyond: Achieving justice through the satisfaction of multiple goals. Law and Society Review, 43, 1–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guala, F. (2012). Reciprocity: Weak or strong? What punishment experiments do (and do not) demonstrate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 1–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 367–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, R., Widmer, E. D., & Christian-Nils, R. (2009). Subjective proximity to crime or social representations? Explaining sentencing attitudes in Switzerland. Social Justice Research, 22, 351–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hampton, J. (1984). The moral education theory of punishment. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 13, 208–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, S. A., McGarty, C., & Turner, J. C. (1996). Salient group memberships and persuasion: The role of social identity in the validation of beliefs. In J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower (Eds.), What’s social about social cognition? Research on socially shared cognition in small groups (pp. 29–56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, R., & Emler, N. P. (1981). Retributive justice. In M. J. Lerner & S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior. New York, NY: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A. (1993). Group cohesiveness: A critical review and some new directions. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 85–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huo, Y. J. (2003). Procedural justice and social regulation across group boundaries: Does subgroup identity undermine relationship-based governance? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 336–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2010). Social justice: History, theory, and research. In S. T. Fiske, D. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 1122–1165). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1785/1993). Grounding for the metaphysics of morals (J. Ellington, Trans.) Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company. (Original work published 1785).

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, L. B., Oswald, M. E., Stucki, I., & Gollwitzer, M. (2010). A closer look at an eye for an eye: Laypersons’ punishment decisions are primarily driven by retributive motives. Social Justice Research, 23, 99–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, N. L., Hymes, R. W., Anderson, A. B., & Weathers, J. E. (1995). Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 545–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow, J., & Schwettmann, L. (2016). The economics of justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 83–106). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurzban, R., DeScioli, P., & O’Brien, E. (2007). Audience effects on altruistic punishment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 75–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of ingroups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 234–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lelieveld, M. C., van Dijk, E., & van Beest, I. (2012). Punishing and compensating others at your own expense: The role of empathic concern on reactions to distributive injustice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 135–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. S., Goldberg, J., & Tetlock, P. (1998). Sober second thought: The effects of accountability, anger, and authoritarianism on attributions of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 563–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lotz, S., Okimoto, T. G., Schlösser, T., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2011). Punitive versus compensatory reactions to injustice: Emotional antecedents to third-party interventions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 477–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marques, J. M., & Paez, D. (1994). The ‘black sheep effect’: Social categorization, rejection of ingroup deviates, and perception of group variability. European Review of Social Psychology, 5, 37–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, T. F. (1998). Restorative justice: An overview. A report by the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate. London, England: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzocco, P. J., Alicke, M. C., & Davis, T. L. (2004). On the robustness of outcome bias: No constraint by prior culpability. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, 131–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullough, M. E., Rachal, K. C., Sandage, S. J., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Brown, S. W., & Hight, T. L. (1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1586–1603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFatter, R. M. (1978). Sentencing strategies and justice: Effects of punishment philosophy on sentencing decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1490–1500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFatter, R. M. (1982). Purposes of punishment: Effects of utilities of criminal sanctions on perceived appropriateness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 255–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKee, I. R., & Feather, N. T. (2008). Revenge, retribution, and values: Social attitudes and punitive sentencing. Social Justice Research, 21, 138–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. T. (2001). Disrespect and the experience of injustice. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 527–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M., & Sidanius, J. (1993). Group status and asymmetry in the relationship between ideology and death penalty support: A social dominance perspective. National Journal of Sociology, 7, 67–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen, E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2014). Compensatory justice. In R. S. Cropanzano & M. Ambrose (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of justice in work organizations. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. G., & Hampton, J. (1988). Forgiveness and mercy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nadler, A., & Shnabel, N. (2008). Instrumental and socioemotional paths to intergroup reconciliation and the needs-based model of socioemotional reconciliation. In A. Nadler, T. E. Malloy, & J. D. Fisher (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup reconciliation. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nelissen, R. M. A., & Zeelenberg, M. (2009). When guilt evokes self-punishment: Evidence for the existence of a Dobby effect. Emotion, 9, 118–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, J., & Aquino, K. (2011). A model of third parties’ morally motivated responses to mistreatment in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 36, 526–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G. (2008). Outcomes as affirmation of membership value: Monetary compensation as an administrative response to procedural injustice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1270–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., & Tyler, T. R. (2007). Is compensation enough? Relational concerns in responding to unintended inequity. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 399–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2008). The symbolic meaning of transgressions: Towards a unifying framework of justice restoration. In K. A. Hegtvedt & J. Clay-Warner (Eds.), Advances in group processes: Justice (Vol. 25, pp. 291–326). Bingley, England: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2009). Punishment as restoration of group and offender values following a transgression: Value consensus through symbolic labelling and offender reform. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 346–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2010). The symbolic identity implications of inter and intra-group transgressions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 552–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2011). Third-party punishment and symbolic intragroup status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 709–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2014). Bridging diverging perspectives and restoration goals in the aftermath of workplace transgressions. Manuscript under review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., Wenzel, M., & Feather, N. T. (2009). Beyond retribution: Conceptualizing restorative justice and exploring its determinants. Social Justice Research, 22, 156–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., Wenzel, M., & Feather, N. T. (2012). Retribution and restoration as general orientations toward justice. European Journal of Personality, 26, 255–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., Wenzel, M., & Platow, M. J. (2010). Restorative justice: Seeking a shared identity in dynamic intragroup contexts. In M. A. Neale, E. Mannix, & E. Mullen (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams (pp. 205–242). Bingley, England: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orth, U. (2003). Punishment goals of crime victims. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 173–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, M. E., Hupfeld, J., Klug, S. C., & Gabriel, U. (2002). Lay-perspectives on criminal deviance, goals of punishment, and punitivity. Social Justice Research, 15, 85–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, M. E., & Stucki, I. (2009). A two-process model of punishment. In M. E. Oswald, S. Bieneck, & J. Hupfeld-Heinemann (Eds.), Social psychology of punishment of crime (pp. 173–191). New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J., & Bekoff, M. (2012). Wild justice redux: What we know about social justice in animals and why it matters. Social Justice Research, 25, 122–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pillutla, M. M., & Murnighan, J. K. (1996). Unfairness, anger, and spite: Emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 208–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, S. A., & Brosnan, S. F. (2012). To each according to his need? Variability in the responses to inequity in non-human primates. Social Justice Research, 25, 140–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raihani, N. J., & McAuliffe, K. (2012). Does inequity aversion motivate punishment? Cleaner fish as a model system. Social Justice Research, 25, 213–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the narcissistic personality inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. (1996). Value priorities and behavior: Applying a theory of integrated value systems. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinada, M., Yamagishi, T., & Ohmura, Y. (2004). False friends are worse than bitter enemies. Altruistic punishment of ingroup members. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 379–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shnabel, N., & Nadler, A. (2008). A needs-based model of reconciliation: Satisfying the differential emotional needs of victim and perpetrator as a key to promoting reconciliation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 116–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., Liu, J., Pratto, F., & Shaw, J. (1994). Social dominance orientation, hierarchy-attenuators and hierarchy-enhancers: Social dominance theory and the criminal justice system. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 338–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., Mitchell, M., Haley, H., & Navarrete, C. D. (2006). Support for harsh criminal sanctions and criminal justice beliefs: A social dominance perspective. Social Justice Research, 19, 433–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1993). The inevitability of oppression and the dynamics of social dominance. In P. Sniderman, P. Tetlock, & E. G. Carmines (Eds.), Prejudice, politics, and the American dilemma (pp. 173–211). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J. (2003). Of different minds: An accessible identity model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 286–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Mullen, E. (2008). Morality and justice: An expanded theoretical perspective and empirical review. Advances in Group Processes, 25, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J., & Houston, D. (2001). When due process is of no consequence: Moral mandates and presumed defendant guilt or innocence. Social Justice Research, 14, 305–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strelan, P., & van Prooijen, J.-W. (2013). Retribution and forgiveness: The healing effects of punishing for just deserts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 544–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talbot, C. F., Price, S. A., & Brosnan, S. F. (2016). Inequity responses in nonhuman animals. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 387–403). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E. (2002). Social-functionalist metaphors for judgment and choice: The intuitive politician, theologian, and prosecutor. Psychological Review, 109, 451–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E., Visser, P. S., Singh, R., Polifroni, M., Scott, A., Elson, S. B., et al. (2007). People as intuitive prosecutors: The impact of social-control goals on attributions of responsibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 195–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thye, S. R., Willer, D., & Markovsky, B. (2006). From status to power: New models at the intersection of two theories. Social Forces, 84, 1471–1495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turillo, C. J., Folger, R., Lavelle, J. J., Umphress, E. E., & Gee, J. O. (2002). Is virtue its own reward? Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89(1), 839–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C. (1987). A self-categorization theory. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory (pp. 42–67). Oxford, England: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Boeckmann, R. J. (1997). Three strikes and you are out, but why? The psychology of public support for punishing rule breakers. Law and Society Review, 31, 237–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1998). Social justice and social movements. In D. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2006). Retributive reactions to suspected offenders: The importance of social categorizations and guilt probability. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 715–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J. W. (2010). Retributive versus compensatory justice: Observers’ preference for punishing in response to criminal offenses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 72–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W., & Kerpershoek, E. F. P. (2013). The impact of choice on retributive reactions: How observers’ autonomy concerns shape responses to criminal offenders. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidmar, N. (2000). Retribution and revenge. In J. Sanders & V. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Handbook of justice research in law (pp. 31–63). New York, NY: Kluwer/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidmar, N. (2002). Retributive justice: Its social context. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 291–313). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vidmar, N., & Miller, D. T. (1980). Social psychological processes underlying attitudes toward legal punishment. Law and Society Review, 14, 401–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. M., & Halloran, M. A. (2004). Rewards and sanctions and the provision of public goods in one-shot settings. Experimental Economics, 7, 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B., Graham, S., & Reyna, C. (1997). An attributional examination of retributive versus utilitarian philosophies of punishment. Social Justice Research, 10, 431–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M. (2002). What is social about justice? Inclusive identity and group values as the basis of the justice motive. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 205–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2010). How acts of forgiveness restore a sense of justice: Addressing status/power and value concerns raised by transgressions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 401–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2012). The varying meaning of forgiveness: Relationship closeness moderates how forgiveness affects feelings of justice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 420–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2014). On the relationship between justice and forgiveness: Are all forms of justice made equal? British Journal of Social Psychology. Manuscript in press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., Feather, N. T., & Platow, M. J. (2008). Retributive and restorative justice. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 375–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., Feather, N. T., & Platow, M. J. (2010). Justice through consensus: Shared identity and the preference for a restorative notion of justice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 909–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., & Cameron, K. (2012). Do retributive and restorative justice processes address different symbolic concerns? Critical Criminology, 20, 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodyatt, L., & Wenzel, M. (2013). The psychological immune response in the face of transgressions: Pseudo self-forgiveness and threat to belonging. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 951–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, E., & Houser, D. (2005). Emotion expression in human punishment behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 102, 7398–7401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi, T., Horita, Y., Takagishi, H., Shinada, M., Tanida, S., & Cook, K. (2009). Private rejection of unfair offers and emotional commitment. PNAS, 106, 11520–11523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia

    Michael Wenzel

  2. University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Tyler G. Okimoto

Authors
  1. Michael Wenzel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tyler G. Okimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Wenzel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Haifa Faculty of Education, Haifa, Israel

    Clara Sabbagh

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Landau, Germany

    Manfred Schmitt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T.G. (2016). Retributive Justice. In: Sabbagh, C., Schmitt, M. (eds) Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-3215-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-3216-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation