Perceived Legitimacy of Collective Punishment as a Function of Democratic versus Non-Democratic Group Structure

Juan M. Falomir-Pichastor (1) , Christian Staerklé (1) , Marie-Aude Depuiset (2) , Fabrizio Butera (2)

1 UNIGE - Université de Genève = University of Geneva
2 UPMF - Université Pierre Mendès France - Grenoble 2

The present research tested the hypothesis that the political structure of groups moderates the perceived legitimacy of collective punishment. Participants read scenarios of fictitious summer camps in which unidentified members of one group aggressed members of another group. The political structure of both the offender and the victim groups was described as either egalitarian or hierarchical (defined with democratic or non-democratic decision-making procedures). Perceived legitimacy of collective punishment directed against all members of the offender group was assessed by measuring the acceptability of sanctions administered by an authority and of revenge actions inflicted by members of the victim group. Results showed that collective punishment was evaluated as less legitimate when the offender group was egalitarian and the victim group was hierarchical. Supplementary analyses showed that this effect was mediated by the higher value attributed to members of the offender egalitarian group when the victim group was hierarchical.

Mots clés: aggression legitimacy; collective punishment; decision-making procedures; democracy; group value

Juan M. Falomir-Pichastor, Christian Staerklé, Marie-Aude Depuiset, Fabrizio Butera. Perceived Legitimacy of Collective Punishment as a Function of Democratic versus Non-Democratic Group Structure. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 2007, 10 (4), pp.565-579. ⟨10.1177/1368430207081543⟩. ⟨hal-00571668⟩