Why do children and adults think others punish?

Past research has demonstrated that both consequentialist motives (such as deterrence) and deontological motives (such as ‘just deserts’) underlie children’s and adults’ punitive behavior. But what motives do we ascribe to others who pursue punishment? The present work explores this question by assessing which punitive motives children (6- and 7-year-olds, n = 100; 67% white; 55% female) and adults (n = 100; 76% white; 35% female) attribute to individuals who witnessed and punished a transgression (third-party punishment). Beyond this, we varied the social role of the punisher (a teacher, an adult visiting a school, a fellow peer) to examine whether motivational ascriptions vary depending on the social context. Across these contexts, children endorsed a variety of punishment motives but consistently rejected the notion that individuals punish for the purpose of inflicting suffering. Adults—like children—prioritized consequentialist motives but, in more personal contexts (involving a child punishing their peer), considered ‘just deserts’ a more plausible motive. These findings speak to developmental and contextual variation in individuals’ theories about punitive motives and provide insight into how individuals understand and respond to punishment in everyday life.

既往研究表明，后果主义动机（如威慑）和道义论动机（如‘应得之果’）均存在于儿童和成人的惩罚行为之中。然而，我们究竟将何种动机归因于那些追求惩罚他人的人呢？本研究旨在探讨这一问题，通过评估儿童（6岁和7岁，样本量为100人，其中67%为白人，55%为女性）和成人（样本量为100人，其中76%为白人，35%为女性）将何种惩罚动机归因于目睹并惩罚违规行为（第三方惩罚）的个人。此外，本研究还改变了惩罚者的社会角色（教师、访问学校的成人、同龄人）以检验动机归因是否因社会背景的不同而有所差异。在这些背景下，儿童认可了多种惩罚动机，但始终否认个人惩罚的目的是为了施加痛苦。成人——如同儿童——优先考虑后果主义动机，但在更亲密的情境中（涉及一个儿童惩罚其同龄人），认为‘应得之果’是更合理的动机。这些发现反映了个体关于惩罚动机理论在发展过程中的变化，以及对个体在日常生活中如何理解和应对惩罚的洞见。