When someone violates a social norm, others may think that some sanction would be appropriate. We examine how the experience of emotions like anger and disgust relate to the judged appropriateness of sanctions, in a pre-registered analysis of data from a large-scale study in 56 societies. Across the world, we find that individuals who experience anger and disgust over a norm violation are more likely to endorse confrontation, ostracism and, to a smaller extent, gossip. Moreover, we find that the experience of anger is consistently the strongest predictor of judgments of confrontation, compared to other emotions. Although the link between state-based emotions and judgments may seem universal, its strength varies across countries. Aligned with theoretical predictions, this link is stronger in societies, and among individuals, that place higher value on individual autonomy. Thus, autonomy values may increase the role that emotions play in guiding judgments of social sanctions.

Aoyama Gakuin University 5 10 1 Fuchinobe Chuo Ku Sagamihara City Kanagawa 252 5258 Japan

CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science Institute of Psychology Chinese Academy of Sciences Lincui Road 16 Chaoyang District Beijing 100101 China

Center for Culture and Evolution Brunel University London Uxbridge UB8 3PH UK

Center for Research in Experimental Economics and Political Decision Making Amsterdam School of Economics University of Amsterdam P O Box 15867 1001 NJ Amsterdam The Netherlands

Center for Social and Psychological Sciences Slovak Academy of Sciences Dubravska Cesta 9 841 04 Bratislava Slovakia

Daugavpils University Latvia Parades Street 1 Room 432 Daugvapils 5400 Latvia

Departamento de Sociología Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana Unidad Iztapalapa Av Rafael Atlixco 186 Col Vicentina 09340 Ciudad de México México

Department of Anthropology University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT UK

Department of Behavioral Sciences and Learning Linköping University 581 83 Linköping Sweden

Department of Culture Politics and Society University of Turin 10135 Turin Italy

Department of Education and Psychology The Open University of Israel 1 University Road 4353701 Raanana Israel

Department of Education and Social Work University of Patras 26500 Rion Patras Greece

Department of Finance Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University P O Box 5701 Riyadh Saudi Arabia

Department of International Management Johannes Kepler University Altenberger Str 69 4040 Linz Austria

Department of International Studies American University of Sharjah PO Box 26666 Sharjah United Arab Emirates

Department of Law and Criminology Institute for the Study of Power Crime and Society Royal Holloway University of London Egham TW20 0EX UK

Department of Personality Psychology Yerevan State University Alex Manoogian 1 0025 Yerevan Armenia

Department of Political Science and Public Administration University of Athens 6 Themistokleous Street 10678 Athens Greece

Department of Political Science Trinity College Dublin 2 3 College Green Dublin 2 Ireland

Department of Psychology American University of Sharjah PO Box 26666 Sharjah United Arab Emirates

Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Zhejiang University 148 Tianmushan Road Hangzhou Zhejiang China

Department of Psychology Monk Prayogshala 4114 C Wing Oberoi Garden Estates Off Saki Vihar Road Andheri East Mumbai Maharashtra 400072 India

Department of Psychology Royal Holloway University of London Egham TW20 0EX UK

Department of Psychology Sungkyunkwan University 25 2 Sungkyunkwan Ro Jongno Gu Seoul 03063 Republic of Korea

Department of Psychology Universitas Airlangga Kampus B Unair Jalan Airlangga 4 6 Surabaya 60286 Indonesia

Department of Psychology University of Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China

Department of Psychology University of Cologne Richard Strauss Str 2 50931 Cologne Germany

Department of Psychology University of Ghana Legon P O Box LG 84 Accra Ghana

Department of Psychology University of Nigeria Nsukka 41000 Nigeria

Department of Psychology University of Western Ontario 1151 Richmond St London ON N6A 5C2 Canada

Department of Psychology York University 4700 Keele Street Toronto ON Canada

Department of Sociology University of South Carolina Columbia SC 29208 USA

Department of Women's and Children's Health University of Uppsala Uppsala Sweden

Experimental and Computational Economics Lab School of Economics Universidad San Francisco de Quito USFQ Diego de Robles y Pampite Quito Ecuador

Facultad de Economía y Empresa Universidad Diego Portales Av Sta Clara 797 Huechuraba Región Metropolitana Chile

Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Department of Sociology Eduardo Mondlane University Av Julius Nyerere 3453 Main Campus Maputo Mozambique

Faculty of Behavioral Sciences Education and Languages HELP University Subang 2 Subang Jaya Malaysia

Faculty of Economics Shiga University 1 1 1 Banba Hikone Shiga 522 8522 Japan

Faculty of Education and Psychology Shahid Beheshti University Tehran 1983969411 Iran

Faculty of Medicine University of Colombo Kynsey Road Colombo 8 Sri Lanka

Faculty of Philosophy and Arts University of Trnava Hornopotočná 23 918 43 Trnava Slovakia

Faculty of Philosophy University of Banja Luka Vojvode Petra Bojovića 1A 78000 Banja Luka Bosnia and Herzegovina

Faculty of Psychology Chulalongkorn University 254 Phayathai Road Pathumwan Bangkok 10330 Thailand

Faculty of Psychology University of Iceland Nyi Gardur Saemundargata 12 IS 102 Reykjavík Iceland

Faculty of Social Sciences Social Psychology University of Helsinki PO Box 42 00014 Helsinki Finland

Faculty of Social Sciences Social Psychology University of Helsinki PO Box 54 00014 Helsinki Finland

Gies College of Business University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign 1206 S 6Th St Champaign IL 61820 USA

Hanoi National University of Education 136 Xuan Thuy Street Cau Giay District Hanoi Vietnam

HUN REN Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Psychology Research Centre of Natural Sciences Budapest Hungary

IESE Business School Camino del Cerro del Águila 3 28023 Madrid Spain

Institute for Futures Studies Box 591 101 31 Stockholm Sweden

Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies National Research Council of Italy 00185 Rome Italy

Institute of Information Processing and Decision Making University of Haifa Abba Khoushy Ave 199 3498838 Haifa Israel

Institute of Psychology Czech Academy of Sciences Veveří 97 602 00 Brno Czech Republic

Institute of Psychology University of Greifswald Greifswald Germany

Instituto de Ciências Sociais Universidade de Lisboa Av Prof Anibal de Bettencourt 9 1600 189 Lisboa Portugal

Instituto Universitário de Lisboa ISCTE IUL CIS Avenida das Forças Armadas 1649 026 Lisbon Portugal

International School of Economics Kazakh British Technical University 59 Tole Bi Street 050000 Almaty Kazakhstan

JEDILab Department of Health Medicine and Caring Sciences Linkoping University Linkoping Sweden

JEDILab Division of Economics Department of Management and Engineering Linköping University Linköping Sweden

Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church Bécsi Út 324 Budapest 1034 Hungary

Kwansei Gakuin University 1 155 Uegahara 1Bancho Nishinomiya Hyogo 662 8501 Japan

Kyiv International Institute of Sociology Voloska Str 8 5 Build 4 Kyiv 04070 Ukraine

Labo PECS Faculty of Social Sciences Université d'Oran 2 31000 Oran Algeria

Leadership and Management Amsterdam Business School University of Amsterdam PO Box 15953 1001 NB Amsterdam The Netherlands

Mackenzie Presbyterian University Business Administration Postgraduate Program Consolação St 930 São Paulo CEP 01302 000 Brazil

Mälardalen University 721 23 Västerås Sweden

Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods Kurt Schumacher Str 10 53113 Bonn Germany

Melbourne School of Psychological Science University of Melbourne 1116 Redmond Barry Building Melbourne VIC 3010 Australia

Moscow State University of Psychology and Education Sretenka Str 29 127051 Moscow Russia

Queen's University Goodes Hall Kingston ON K7L 3N6 Canada

Saint Petersburg State University 7 9 Universitetskaya Emb St Petersburg 199034 Russia

School of Humanities and Social Sciences United States International University Africa Box 14634 00800 Nairobi Kenya

School of Natural Sciences and Health Tallinn University Narva Rd 25 10120 Tallinn Estonia

School of Psychology University of Kent Canterbury CT2 7NP UK

School of Social Sciences Singapore Management University 90 Stamford Road Singapore 178903 Singapore

Stern School of Business New York University 40 West 4Th Street Tisch Hall Suite 700 New York NY 10012 USA

Sunway University No 5 Jalan Universiti Bandar Sunway 47500 Petaling Jaya Selangor Darul Ehsan Malaysia

SWPS University Chodakowska 19 31 03 815 Warsaw Poland

The Institute for Analytical Sociology Linköping University Linköping Sweden

Universal College Bangladesh Dhaka Bangladesh

University of Turin and Collegio Carlo Alberto Lungo Dora Siena 100 10124 Turin Italy

Vienna University of Economics and Business Welthandelsplatz 1 1020 Vienna Austria

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Gelfand MJ, Harrington JR, Jackson JC. The strength of social norms across human groups. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2017;12(5):800–809. doi: 10.1177/1745691617708631. PubMed DOI

Henrich J, McElreath R, Barr A, Ensminger J, Barrett C, Bolyanatz A, Cardenas JC, Gurven M, Gwako E, Henrich N, Lesorogol C, Marlowe F, Tracer D, Ziker J. Costly punishment across human societies. Science. 2006;312(5781):1767–1770. doi: 10.1126/science.1127333. PubMed DOI

Kanakogi Y, Miyazaki M, Takahashi H, Yamamoto H, Kobayashi T, Hiraki K. Third-party punishment by preverbal infants. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2022;6(9):1234–1242. doi: 10.1038/s41562-022-01354-2. PubMed DOI PMC

Strimling P, De Barra M, Eriksson K. Asymmetries in punishment propensity may drive the civilizing process. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2018;2(2):148–155. doi: 10.1038/s41562-017-0278-z. DOI

Eriksson K, Andersson PA, Strimling P. Moderators of the disapproval of peer punishment. Group Process. Intergroup Relations. 2016;19(2):152–168. doi: 10.1177/1368430215583519. DOI

Eriksson K, Andersson PA, Strimling P. When is it appropriate to reprimand a norm violation? The roles of anger, behavioral consequences, violation severity, and social distance. Judgment Decision Making. 2017;12(4):396–407. doi: 10.1017/S1930297500006264. DOI

Eriksson K, Strimling P, Andersson PA, Aveyard M, Brauer M, Gritskov V, Kiyonari T, Kuhlman DM, Maitner AT, Manesi Z, Molho C, Peperkoorn LS, Rizwan M, Stivers AW, Tian Q, Van Lange PAM, Vartanova I, Wu J, Yamagishi T. Cultural universals and cultural differences in meta-norms about peer punishment. Manag. Org. Rev. 2017;13(4):851–870. doi: 10.1017/mor.2017.42. DOI

Eriksson K, Strimling P, Gelfand M, Wu J, Abernathy J, Akotia CS, Aldashev A, Andersson PA, Andrighetto G, Anum A, Arikan G, Aycan Z, Bagherian F, Barrera D, Basnight-Brown D, Batkeyev B, Belaus A, Berezina E, Björnstjerna M, et al. Perceptions of the appropriate response to norm violation in 57 societies. Nat. Commun. 2021;12(1):1481. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-21602-9. PubMed DOI PMC

Murray, D. R., & Schaller, M. (2016). The behavioral immune system. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 53, pp. 75–129). Elsevier. 10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.09.002

Tybur JM, Inbar Y, Aarøe L, Barclay P, Barlow FK, De Barra M, Becker DV, Borovoi L, Choi I, Choi JA, Consedine NS, Conway A, Conway JR, Conway P, Adoric VC, Demirci DE, Fernández AM, Ferreira DCS, Ishii K, et al. Parasite stress and pathogen avoidance relate to distinct dimensions of political ideology across 30 nations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2016;113(44):12408–12413. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1607398113. PubMed DOI PMC

Sell A, Tooby J, Cosmides L. Formidability and the logic of human anger. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2009;106(35):15073–15078. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0904312106. PubMed DOI PMC

Neuberg SL, Kenrick DT, Schaller M. Human threat management systems: Self-protection and disease avoidance. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2011;35(4):1042–1051. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.08.011. PubMed DOI PMC

Lindquist KA, Jackson JC, Leshin J, Satpute AB, Gendron M. The cultural evolution of emotion. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 2022;1(11):669–681. doi: 10.1038/s44159-022-00105-4. DOI

Baumert A, Mentrup FE, Klümper L, Sasse J. Personality processes of everyday moral courage. J. Personality. 2023 doi: 10.1111/jopy.12850. PubMed DOI

Sasse J, Halmburger A, Baumert A. The functions of anger in moral courage—Insights from a behavioral study. Emotion. 2022;22(6):1321–1335. doi: 10.1037/emo0000906. PubMed DOI

Giner-Sorolla, R., Kupfer, T., & Sabo, J. (2018). What makes moral disgust special? An integrative functional review. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 57, pp. 223–289). Elsevier. 10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.10.001

Haidt J. The moral emotions. In: Davidson RJ, Scherer KR, Goldsmith HH, editors. Handbook of Affective Sciences. Oxford University Press; 2003. pp. 852–870.

Chaurand N, Brauer M. What determines social control? People’s reactions to counternormative behaviors in urban environments1. J. Appl. Social Psychol. 2008;38(7):1689–1715. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00365.x. DOI

Shweder, R. A., Much, N. C., Mahapatra, M., & Park, L. The ‘big three’ of morality (autonomy, community, and divinity) and the ‘big three’ explanations of suffering. in (A. M. Brandt & P. Rozin, Eds.) Morality and health, 119–169. (Routledge, 1997).

Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral foundations theory. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55–130). Elsevier. 10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4

Hutcherson CA, Gross JJ. The moral emotions: A social–functionalist account of anger, disgust, and contempt. J. Personality Social Psychol. 2011;100(4):719–737. doi: 10.1037/a0022408. PubMed DOI

Mischkowski D, Glöckner A, Lewisch P. From spontaneous cooperation to spontaneous punishment—Distinguishing the underlying motives driving spontaneous behavior in first and second order public good games. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decision Process. 2018;149:59–72. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.07.001. DOI

Molho C, Tybur JM, Güler E, Balliet D, Hofmann W. Disgust and anger relate to different aggressive responses to moral violations. Psychol. Sci. 2017;28(5):609–619. doi: 10.1177/0956797617692000. PubMed DOI PMC

Schein C, Ritter RS, Gray K. Harm mediates the disgust-immorality link. Emotion. 2016;16(6):862–876. doi: 10.1037/emo0000167. PubMed DOI

Tybur JM, Molho C, Cakmak B, Cruz TD, Singh GD, Zwicker M. Disgust, anger, and aggression: Further tests of the equivalence of moral emotions. Collabra Psychol. 2020;6(1):34. doi: 10.1525/collabra.349. DOI

Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A. Most people are not WEIRD. Nature. 2010;466(7302):29–29. doi: 10.1038/466029a. PubMed DOI

Barrett LF. Are emotions natural kinds? Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2006;1(1):28–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00003.x. PubMed DOI

Ekman P. Are there basic emotions? Psychol. Rev. 1992;99(3):550–553. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.99.3.550. PubMed DOI

Mesquita, B. (2022). Between Us: How Culture Creates Emotions. W. W. Norton and Co.

Gendron M, Roberson D, Van Der Vyver JM, Barrett LF. Perceptions of emotion from facial expressions are not culturally universal: Evidence from a remote culture. Emotion. 2014;14(2):251–262. doi: 10.1037/a0036052. PubMed DOI PMC

Elwood, L. S., Olatunji, B. O., & Williams, N. L. (2009). A cross-cultural perspective on disgust. In B. O. Olatunji & D. McKay. Disgust and Its Disorders: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment Implications (pp. 99–122). American Psychological Association.

Royzman E, Kurzban R. Minding the metaphor: The elusive character of moral disgust. Emot. Rev. 2011;3(3):269–271. doi: 10.1177/1754073911402371. DOI

Cameron CD, Lindquist KA, Gray K. A constructionist review of morality and emotions: No evidence for specific links between moral content and discrete emotions. Personality Social Psychol. Rev. 2015;19(4):371–394. doi: 10.1177/1088868314566683. PubMed DOI

Carver CS, Harmon-Jones E. Anger is an approach-related affect: Evidence and implications. Psychol. Bull. 2009;135(2):183–204. doi: 10.1037/a0013965. PubMed DOI

Curtis V, Biran A. Dirt, disgust, and disease: Is hygiene in our genes? Perspect. Biol. Med. 2001;44(1):17–31. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2001.0001. PubMed DOI

Molho C, Tybur JM, Van Lange PAM, Balliet D. Direct and indirect punishment of norm violations in daily life. Nat. Commun. 2020;11(1):3432. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-17286-2. PubMed DOI PMC

Molho C, Wu J. Direct punishment and indirect reputation-based tactics to intervene against offences. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2021;376(1838):20200289. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0289. PubMed DOI PMC

Gutierrez R, Giner-Sorolla R. Anger, disgust, and presumption of harm as reactions to taboo-breaking behaviors. Emotion. 2007;7(4):853–868. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.7.4.853. PubMed DOI

Konishi N, Himichi T, Ohtsubo Y. Heart rate reveals the difference between disgust and anger in the domain of morality. Evolut. Behav. Sci. 2020;14(3):284–298. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000179. DOI

Bloom P. Religion, morality, evolution. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2012;63(1):179–199. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100334. PubMed DOI

Eriksson K, Vartanova I, Ornstein P, Strimling P. The common-is-moral association is stronger among less religious people. Human. Social Sci. Commun. 2021;8(1):109. doi: 10.1057/s41599-021-00791-0. DOI

Schwartz S. A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comp. Sociol. 2006;5(2–3):137–182. doi: 10.1163/156913306778667357. DOI

Gelfand MJ, Raver JL, Nishii L, Leslie LM, Lun J, Lim BC, Duan L, Almaliach A, Ang S, Arnadottir J, Aycan Z, Boehnke K, Boski P, Cabecinhas R, Chan D, Chhokar J, D’Amato A, Ferrer M, Fischlmayr IC, et al. Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science. 2011;332(6033):1100–1104. doi: 10.1126/science.1197754. PubMed DOI

Maitner AT, DeCoster J, Andersson PA, Eriksson K, Sherbaji S, Giner-Sorolla R, Mackie DM, Aveyard M, Claypool HM, Crisp RJ, Gritskov V, Habjan K, Hartanto A, Kiyonari T, Kuzminska AO, Manesi Z, Molho C, Munasinghe A, Peperkoorn LS, et al. Perceptions of emotional functionality: Similarities and differences among dignity, face, and honor cultures. J. Cross-Cultural Psychol. 2022;53(3–4):263–288. doi: 10.1177/00220221211065108. DOI

Royzman E, Atanasov P, Landy JF, Parks A, Gepty A. CAD or MAD? Anger (not disgust) as the predominant response to pathogen-free violations of the divinity code. Emotion. 2014;14(5):892–907. doi: 10.1037/a0036829. PubMed DOI

Sunar D, Cesur S, Piyale ZE, Tepe B, Biten AF, Hill CT, Koç Y. People respond with different moral emotions to violations in different relational models: A cross-cultural comparison. Emotion. 2021;21(4):693–706. doi: 10.1037/emo0000736. PubMed DOI

Matsumoto D, Yoo SH, Fontaine J. Mapping expressive differences around the world: The relationship between emotional display rules and individualism versus collectivism. J. Cross-Cultural Psychol. 2008;39(1):55–74. doi: 10.1177/0022022107311854. DOI

Vishkin A, Kitayama S, Berg MK, Diener E, Gross-Manos D, Ben-Arieh A, Tamir M. Adherence to emotion norms is greater in individualist cultures than in collectivist cultures. J. Personality Social Psychol. 2023;124(6):1256–1276. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000409. PubMed DOI

Guerra VM, Giner-Sorolla R. The community, autonomy, and divinity scale (CADS): A new tool for the cross-cultural study of morality. J. Cross-Cultural Psychol. 2010;41(1):35–50. doi: 10.1177/0022022109348919. DOI

Inglehart, R., & Oyserman, D. (2004). Individualism, autonomy, and self-expression: The human development syndrome. in (H. Vinken, J. Soeters, & P. Ester, Eds.) Comparing Cultures: Dimensions of Culture in a Comparative Perspective (pp. 74–96). Brill.

Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2010). Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The human development sequence (9. printing). Cambridge Univ. Press.

Storm I. Morality in context: A multilevel analysis of the relationship between religion and values in Europe. Politics Religion. 2016;9(1):111–138. doi: 10.1017/S1755048315000899. DOI

Haerpfer, C., Inglehart, R., Moreno, A., Welzel, C., Kizilova, K., Diez-Medrano, J., Lagos, M., Norris, P., Ponarin, E., & Puranen, B. (2020). World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017–2020) Cross-National Data-Set (1.5). World Values Survey Association. 10.14281/18241.1

Everyday norms have become more permissive over time and vary across cultures