Counter-punishment, norm-communication and accountability

Abstract

We study whether communication can limit the negative consequences of the use of counterpunishment in a public goods environment. The two dimensions of communication we study are norm communication and accountability, having to justify one’s actions to others. We conduct four experimental treatments, all involving a contribution stage, a punishment stage and a counterpunishment stage. In the first stage there are no communication possibilities. The second treatment allows for communication at the punishment stage and the third asks for a justification message at the counter-punishment stage. The fourth combines the two communication channels of the second and third treatments. We find that the three treatments involving communication at any of the two relevant stages lead to significantly higher contributions than the baseline treatment. The detrimental effect of allowing for counter-punishment is neutralized in the presence of communication possibilities. We find no difference between the three treatments with communication. Separately norm communication and being held accountable work equally well and we find no interaction effect from using them jointly. We also relate our results to those of other treatments without counter-punishment opportunities. The overall pattern of results shows that the key factor is the presence of communication. Whenever it is possible contributions are higher than when it is not, regardless of counter-punishment opportunities