3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      State Absence, Vengeance, and the Logic of Vigilantism in Guatemala

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Across the world, citizens sidestep the state to punish offenses on their own. Such vigilantism can help communities provide order, yet it raises concerns about public accountability and the rights of the accused. While prior research has identified the structural correlates of vigilantism, an open question is in which cases citizens prefer vigilantism over conventional policing. To make sense of these preferences, we draw on two logics of punishment: state substitution and retribution. Using survey data from a conjoint experiment presented to over 9000 households across Guatemala, we find that preferences for vigilantism depend on how transgressive the crime is as well as how unlikely it is to be prosecuted by the state. Victim and perpetrator gender, as well as crime severity and profession of the perpetrator, affect whether people endorse vigilante punishment. These results ultimately raise concerns about the viability of "informal" forms of policing.

          Related collections

          Most cited references98

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Altruistic punishment in humans.

          Human cooperation is an evolutionary puzzle. Unlike other creatures, people frequently cooperate with genetically unrelated strangers, often in large groups, with people they will never meet again, and when reputation gains are small or absent. These patterns of cooperation cannot be explained by the nepotistic motives associated with the evolutionary theory of kin selection and the selfish motives associated with signalling theory or the theory of reciprocal altruism. Here we show experimentally that the altruistic punishment of defectors is a key motive for the explanation of cooperation. Altruistic punishment means that individuals punish, although the punishment is costly for them and yields no material gain. We show that cooperation flourishes if altruistic punishment is possible, and breaks down if it is ruled out. The evidence indicates that negative emotions towards defectors are the proximate mechanism behind altruistic punishment. These results suggest that future study of the evolution of human cooperation should include a strong focus on explaining altruistic punishment.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments

            Survey experiments are a core tool for causal inference. Yet, the design of classical survey experiments prevents them from identifying which components of a multidimensional treatment are influential. Here, we show howconjoint analysis, an experimental design yet to be widely applied in political science, enables researchers to estimate the causal effects of multiple treatment components and assess several causal hypotheses simultaneously. In conjoint analysis, respondents score a set of alternatives, where each has randomly varied attributes. Here, we undertake a formal identification analysis to integrate conjoint analysis with the potential outcomes framework for causal inference. We propose a new causal estimand and show that it can be nonparametrically identified and easily estimated from conjoint data using a fully randomized design. The analysis enables us to propose diagnostic checks for the identification assumptions. We then demonstrate the value of these techniques through empirical applications to voter decision making and attitudes toward immigrants.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The psychology of the unthinkable: taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals.

              Five studies explored cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses to proscribed forms of social cognition. Experiments 1 and 2 revealed that people responded to taboo trade-offs that monetized sacred values with moral outrage and cleansing. Experiments 3 and 4 revealed that racial egalitarians were least likely to use, and angriest at those who did use, race-tainted base rates and that egalitarians who inadvertently used such base rates tried to reaffirm their fair-mindedness. Experiment 5 revealed that Christian fundamentalists were most likely to reject heretical counterfactuals that applied everyday causal schemata to Biblical narratives and to engage in moral cleansing after merely contemplating such possibilities. Although the results fit the sacred-value-protection model (SVPM) better than rival formulations, the SVPM must draw on cross-cultural taxonomies of relational schemata to specify normative boundaries on thought.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Comparative Political Studies
                Comparative Political Studies
                SAGE Publications
                0010-4140
                1552-3829
                January 2024
                May 21 2023
                January 2024
                : 57
                : 1
                : 147-181
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
                [2 ]Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
                [3 ]University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
                [4 ]University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA
                Article
                10.1177/00104140231169026
                29dc8173-3bd8-47ec-8ebb-3b206402b2d7
                © 2024

                http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article