What is it about?
This paper is about "collective punishment": the punishment inflicted upon an entire collectivity following an offense, even though its members are innocent (e.g., boycotts, embargos, economic and political sanctions, civilian casualties in times of war, etc.). It attempts to better understand the reasons for which people support collective punishment, and how a group's apologies can help avoid such punishment.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
This paper is important because it shows how people's reasoning regarding justice issues is sometimes biased. In particular, it illustrates that people paradoxically support collective punishment (a rather unjust measure) when their need to restore a sense of justice is strong. This paper also shows that, fortunately, the group members targeted by collective punishment can escape it by offering collective apologies.
Perspectives
To me, this paper has the potential to help us understand otherwise complex situations in the aftermath of an offense. Why do people react so badly towards an offender's entire group? Why to they support apparently unfair measures to restore justice? Why should a group of innocents apologize, even though its members do not feel like doing so? Ultimately, this paper has important implications for justice restoration, peacebuilding, and crisis communication.
Jacques Berent
University of Geneva (Switzerland)
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Collective Apologies Moderate the Effects of Justice Concerns on Support for Collective Punishment, Social Psychology, August 2017, Hogrefe Publishing Group,
DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000309.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
