Abstract:Why do individuals pay costs to punish selfish behavior, even as third-party observers? A large body of research suggests that reputation plays an important role in motivating such third-party punishment (TPP). Here we focus on a recently proposed reputation-based account (Jordan et al., 2016) that invokes costly signaling. This account proposed that “trustworthy type” individuals (who are incentivized to cooperate with others) typically experience lower costs of TPP, and thus that TPP can function as a costly signal of trustworthiness. Specifically, it was argued that some but not all individuals face incentives to cooperate, making them high-quality and trustworthy interaction partners; and, because the same mechanisms that incentivize cooperation also create benefits for using TPP to deter selfish behavior, these individuals are likely to experience reduced costs of punishing selfishness. Here, we extend this conceptual framework by providing a concrete, “from-the-ground-up” model demonstrating how this process could work in the context of repeated interactions incentivizing both cooperation and punishment. We show how individual differences in the probability of future interaction can create types that vary in whether they find cooperation payoff-maximizing (and thus make high-quality partners), as well as in their net costs of TPP – because a higher continuation probability increases the likelihood of receiving rewards from the victim of the punished transgression (thus offsetting the cost of punishing). We also provide a simple model of dispersal that demonstrates how types that vary in their continuation probabilities can stably coexist, because the payoff from remaining in one’s local environment (i.e. not dispersing) decreases with the number of others who stay. Together, this model demonstrates, from the group up, how TPP can serve as a costly signal of trustworthiness arising from exposure to repeated interactions.

Is a punisher always trustworthy? In-group punishment reduces trust

Severity and deservedness determine signalled trustworthiness in third party punishment

How Intergroup Relation Moderates Group Bias in Third-Party Punishment

Third-party punishment as a costly signal of trustworthiness

Render help or stand by? The effect of group size on third-party punishment and its neural mechanisms

Group membership and adolescents' third-party punishment: a moderated chain mediation model

Strategic Exploitation by Higher-Status People Incurs Harsher Third-Party Punishment

Group environment promotes the third-party punishment for maintaining social fairness: evidence from ERPs and neural oscillations

The source of punishment matters: Third-party punishment restrains observers from selfish behaviors better than does second-party punishment by shaping norm perceptions

Both Loved and Feared: Third Party Punishers Are Viewed as Formidable and Likeable, but These Reputational Benefits May Only Be Open to Dominant Individuals

Third-Party Punishment as a Costly Signal of High Continuation Probabilities in Repeated Games

Consequentialist Motives for Punishment Signal Trustworthiness

Group Membership Modulates the Neural Circuitry Underlying Third Party Punishment

Third-Party Punishment or Compensation? It Depends on the Reputational Benefits

How retributive motives shape the emergence of third‐party punishment across intergroup contexts

Reflexive or Reflective? Group Bias in Third-Party Punishment in Chinese and Western Cultures

Punishment in the public goods game is evaluated negatively irrespective of non-cooperators' motivation

On the fragility of third-party punishment: The context effect of a dominated risky investment option

Receivers' responses are integrated into costly third-party punishment in a way that interacts with the unfairness of allocations

Altruistic punishment in intergroup context

Teachers' Punishment Intensity and Student Observer Trust: A Moderated Mediation Model