Punishment is a negative sanction imposed on the violator of a system of rules and imposed by an authorized agent of that system of rules. The criminal courts can impose punishment on people for their violations of criminal law. The referee can impose punishment on those who violate the rules of a game of hockey. The principal can impose punishment on students who violate rules of the school. Retribution is now used exclusively to refer to punishment deserved because of an offence and which fits the severity of the offence. Penology, from Latin poena for punishment, comprises penitentiary science. Operant Conditioning is the process by which an individual's behavior is shaped by Reinforcement or by Punishment. In psychology, implications for therapies and treatments using Classical Conditioning differ from operant conditioning.
The evolution of
Although "altruistic punishment" may explain the high levels of cooperation in human societies, it creates an evolutionary puzzle. The evolution of altruistic punishment leads to the prediction that people will not incur costs to punish others to provide benefits to large groups of nonrelatives. However, here we show that an important asymmetry between altruistic cooperation and altruistic punishment allows altruistic punishment to evolve in populations engaged in one-time, anonymous interactions. This process allows both altruistic punishment and altruistic cooperation to be maintained even when groups are large. - Boyd R, Gintis H, Bowles S, Richerson PJ.
Altruistic punishment and
the origin of cooperation
James H. Fowler, Department of Political Science, University of California
Edited by Henry C. Harpending, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
How did human cooperation evolve? Recent evidence shows that many people are willing to engage in altruistic punishment, voluntarily paying a cost to punish noncooperators. Although this behavior helps to explain how cooperation can persist, it creates an important puzzle. The model suggests that the cycle of strategies in voluntary public goods games does not persist in the presence of punishment strategies. It also suggests that punishment can only enforce payoff-improving strategies, contrary to a widely cited "folk theorem" result that suggests that punishment can allow the evolution of any strategy.
Costly Punishment Across
Joseph Henrich, Richard McElreath, Abigail Barr, Jean Ensminger, Clark Barrett, Alexander Bolyanatz, Juan Camilo Cardenas, Michael Gurven, Edwins Gwako, Natalie Henrich, Carolyn Lesorogol, Frank Marlowe, David Tracer, John Ziker
Recent behavioral experiments aimed at understanding the evolutionary foundations of human cooperation have suggested that a willingness to engage in costly punishment, even in one-shot situations, may be part of human psychology and a key element in understanding our sociality. All populations demonstrate some willingness to administer costly punishment as unequal behavior increases, the magnitude of this punishment varies substantially across populations, and costly punishment positively covaries with altruistic behavior across populations.
The Neural Basis of Altruistic Punishment - Dominique J. F. de Quervain, Urs Fischbacher, Valerie Treyer, Melanie Schellhammer, Ulrich Schnyder, Alfred Buck, Ernst Fehr
Many people voluntarily incur costs to punish violations of social norms. Evolutionary models and empirical evidence indicate that such altruistic punishment has been a decisive force in the evolution of human cooperation. Symbolic punishment did not reduce the defector's economic payoff, whereas effective punishment did reduce the payoff. We scanned the subjects' brains while they learned about the defector's abuse of trust and determined the punishment. Effective punishment, as compared with symbolic punishment, activated the dorsal striatum, which has been implicated in the processing of rewards that accrue as a result of goal-directed actions.