IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chu/wpaper/22-12.html

United We Stand: On the Benefits of Coordinated Punishment

Author

Listed:
  • Vicente Calabuig

    (University of Valencia)

  • Natalia Jimenez

    (Universidad Pablo de Olavide)

  • Gonzalo Olcina

    (University of Valencia)

  • Ismael Rodriguez-Lara

    (Universidad de Granada and Economic Science Institute, Chapman University)

Abstract

Coordinated punishment occurs when punishment decisions are complements; i.e., this punishment device requires a specific number of punishers to be effective; otherwise, no damage will be inflicted on the target. While societies often rely on this punishment device, its benefits are unclear compared with uncoordinated punishment, where punishment decisions are substitutes. We argue that coordinated punishment can prevent the free-riding of punishers and show, both theoretically and experimentally, that this may be beneficial for cooperation in a team investment game, compared with uncoordinated punishment.

Suggested Citation

  • Vicente Calabuig & Natalia Jimenez & Gonzalo Olcina & Ismael Rodriguez-Lara, 2022. "United We Stand: On the Benefits of Coordinated Punishment," Working Papers 22-12, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:chu:wpaper:22-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/esi_working_papers/373/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vicente Calabuig & Natalia Jiménez-Jiménez & Gonzalo Olcina & Ismael Rodriguez-Lara, 2024. "Coordinated and uncoordinated punishment in a team investment game," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 191-217, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D69 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Other
    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor Economics: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:chu:wpaper:22-12. 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: Megan Luetje (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esichus.html .

    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.