Approval of ostracism as a legal sanction: The justification effect of utilitarian rationale

Abstract

Ostracism is a contradicted social action because it has been widely adopted as a legal sanction but is also considered to be excessive enforcement. In the present study, we conducted a scenario-based experiment to examine the psychological process underlying the endorsement of ostracism in school settings. We focused on three general rationales to justify the sanction: a general prevention to protect public welfare (utilitarianism); a counter to deviance from social norms (retributivism); and a type of education to rehabilitate a perpetrator (moral education). The results showed that utilitarianism was more effective in justifying ostracism than retributivism or moral education. Further, preferences towards ostracism based in utilitarianism were less susceptible to influence from others. These findings indicate people’s general preference for the protection of public welfare over the segregation of wrongdoers.