Investigating the Causal Effects of Anger on Costly Third-Party Punishment

Anger, as a common reaction to injustice and due to its approach motivation, is assumed to fuel the costly punishment of others’ unjust acts, even if they do not affect one personally. Yet, to date, this causal role of anger in costly third-party punishment is underexplored. To close this gap, we conducted a series of seven studies (total N = 3249) in which we experimentally induced anger and assessed consequential behavioral reactions to unfair dictator decisions in the third-party punishment game (3PPG). In five studies, we used incidental anger induction procedures (imagery or autobiographical recall) that allowed us to induce anger without altering the specifics of the game. In all studies, anger was successfully induced yet did not lead to more punishment compared to an emotionally neutral control condition. In two further studies, we then used integral anger induction procedures (framing and regulation) to manipulate anger that originates in the game. Particularly framing showed to be effective: Here, the dictator’s unfair split was held constant across conditions but was either the result of giving little to or taking a lot from the recipient. As expected, participants in the take-condition experienced more anger than in the give-condition. Importantly, participants in the take-condition punished more than participants in the give-condition and the effect was mediated through experienced anger. Taken together, this series of studies provided evidence for the causal role of anger for third-party punishment but only if anger originates from the unfair act itself.