IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v2y2018i2d10.1038_s41562-017-0278-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Asymmetries in punishment propensity may drive the civilizing process

Author

Listed:
  • Pontus Strimling

    (Institute for Future Studies
    Stockholm University)

  • Mícheál de Barra

    (Stockholm University
    University of Aberdeen)

  • Kimmo Eriksson

    (Stockholm University
    Mälardalen University)

Abstract

Norms about hygiene and violence have both shown a tendency to become increasingly strict, in the sense that the handling of bodily fluids and the use of violence have become increasingly restricted. The generality of this directional change across a large number of societies has not been captured by previous explanations. We propose an explanation of the directional change that is based on the aggregation of everyday interactions. This theory posits that directional norm change can come about if there is an asymmetry in punishment propensity between the people who prefer stricter norms and those who prefer looser norms. Asymmetry in punishment can arise from underlying asymmetry in the threat perceived, where a stricter-than-preferred behaviour is perceived as inherently less threatening than a looser one. We demonstrate the logic of the theory using a formal model and test some of its assumptions through survey experiments.

Suggested Citation

  • Pontus Strimling & Mícheál de Barra & Kimmo Eriksson, 2018. "Asymmetries in punishment propensity may drive the civilizing process," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(2), pages 148-155, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:2:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1038_s41562-017-0278-z
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-017-0278-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0278-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-017-0278-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:2:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1038_s41562-017-0278-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.