Does the use of punishment lead to greater cooperation within interpersonal situations? Researchers at Harvard University emphatically suggest that it does not. Using a slight variation of the Prisoner’s Dilemma game, a classic paradigm used to study cooperation, they found that the use of punitive behavior to coerce others into cooperation causes less overall cooperative behavior from others, leads to reduced individual pay-off, and provides no benefit for the group as a whole. Even more, the researchers found that the top-ranked players in the game rarely used punishment at all, opting instead to employ a tit-for-tat strategy, whereas the lowest ranked players, in contrast, made use of costly punishment. The study’s authors suggest that punishment can lead to a downward spiral of retaliation which can have negative consequences for everyone involved. One question of interest then is why does there exist such a strong motivation in humans to punish when engaged with others in a competitive task. One answer suggested by the researchers is that punitive behaviors may serve to establish a dominance hierarchy or to defend ownership of property and good. However, the overall conclusion that can be drawn from this study is clear: the use of costly punishment does not promote cooperative behaviors and those who readily employ it are often left at a severe disadvantage; in other words, punish and perish!
