Offloading punishment to karma: Thinking about karma reduces the punishment of transgressors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Punishment and the threat thereof can help enforce social norms, but enacting punishment is often costly. To avoid these costs, individuals may prefer to offload the responsibility of punishment to others or to cultural institutions. We propose that shared beliefs about supernatural punishment contribute to minimizing the costs of interpersonal punishment by allowing people to offload punishment to supernatural entities. In a Third Party Punishment Game, we specifically test in a pre-registered experiment ( N = 1603 Americans and Singaporeans adults, recruited through Qualtrics' online panels) whether thinking about karma (a supernatural force that punishes misdeeds) reduces punishment. Results confirm that being prompted to consider karma reduces inclinations to punish selfishness in a Third Party Punishment Game. A second pre-registered study using a subtler prime of karma replicated this effect. These findings suggest that karma beliefs may have played a role in the cultural evolution of human cooperation by reducing the costs of human norm enforcement while maintaining incentives for prosocial behaviour through the threat of supernatural punishment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it