|Abstract||People expect to reap hedonic rewards when they punish an offender, but in at least some instances, revenge has hedonic consequences that are precisely opposite to those that people expect. Three studies showed that (a) one reason for this is that people who punish continue to ruminate about the offender, whereas those who do not punish "move on" and think less about the offender, and (b) people fail to appreciate the different affective consequences of witnessing and instigating punishment.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Daniel Nolan (2009). Consequentialism and Side Constraints. Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (1):5-22.
Michael Davis (2000). Revenge, Victim's Rights, and Criminal Justice. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (1):119-128.
Alain Morin (2002). Self-Awareness Review Part 1: Do You "Self-Reflect" or "Self-Ruminate"? Science and Consciousness Review 1:1.
Adam Waytz, Kurt Gray, Nicholas Epley & Daniel Wegner (2010). Causes and Consequences of Mind Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14 (8):383-388.
Dennis J. Baker (2008). Constitutionalizing the Harm Principle. Criminal Justice Ethics 27 (2):3-28.
C. Bicchieri, E. Xiao & R. Muldoon (2011). Trustworthiness is a Social Norm, but Trusting is Not. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 10 (2):170-187.
Charles Barton (2000). Getting Even Again. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (1):129-142.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #87,888 of 549,065 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,252 of 549,065 )
How can I increase my downloads?