Menus Subscribe Search

Follow us


Should We Let Violinists’ Bad Behavior Slide?

• June 25, 2012 • 9:12 AM

Would you vote for a musician who was clearly better than her competitor, but also behaved immorally?

Imagine, for a moment, you’re a judge at a music competition. You learn that a highly promising violinist has been sabotaging her competitors’ performances. Do you punish her for this behavior?

Surprising new research from Switzerland suggests the answer may depend upon your line of work.

“People turn out to be choosy with respect to the (ethical) norms they are willing to enforce in particular circumstances,” writes a research team led by Christine Clavien of the University of Lausanne’s Department of Ecology and Evolution.

Its study, published in the online journal PLoS One, provides limited support for the notion that humans are inherently inclined to punish others who violate an established code of conduct—even if they’re not directly affected by the misbehavior in question. According to some evolutionary theorists, this impulse reflects the fact that societies that keep transgressors in line are more likely to thrive.

But the research also suggests that punishing rule-breakers is far from a universal impulse. At least in this study, it manifested in counterintuitive ways, with teachers-in-training being the most likely to punish the badly behaving musician, and police recruits the least.

The experiment featured three groups of students: 66 in training to be schoolteachers (they ranged in age from 18 to 35), 109 taking preparatory classes to become police officers (ages 19 to 43), and 122 high schoolers (ages 14 to 18). Sitting at a computer and wearing headphones, each participant watched videos of two professional female violinists performing an excerpt from a Mozart violin concerto.

They were told the musicians were in a competition, and the winner would be awarded a coveted recording contract. “By design,” the researchers write, “one violinist’s musical performance was better, according to professional standards, than the other.”

After watching the performances, half the participants were given positive information about both players’ personal behavior. For the other half, “the more talented violinist was described as morally disrespectful,” the researchers write. Specifically, they were told by one of her professors that she mistuned her fellow students’ instruments and sabotaged their scores just before concerts.

With this information in mind, all participants then voted for the “one violinist that they considered worthy of career advancement.” The researchers found the accusations of immoral conduct cost the miscreant violinist votes, but this effect was not consistent across the board.

Of the three groups, the future teachers were by far the most likely to punish the perpetrator. Among teachers-in-training who heard good things about both, over 80 percent chose the clearly superior player. But those who learned about her misbehavior split their votes just about evenly, with a significant number voting against her even though they realized she was the superior musician.

In contrast, learning of her misbehavior had almost no effect on how the high school students and prospective police officers voted. For them, news of her immoral actions decreased support by only about 2.5 percent.

On the surface, this is somewhat surprising; one might expect future law-enforcement officials to be particularly sensitive to rule-breaking behavior. But then, the researchers note, the specific infractions mentioned here “may be more relevant for teachers” than for peace officers, since no actual laws were broken.

While it might make sense for a cop to let a misbehaving youngster off with a warning, “It is strategically advantageous for teachers to be able to punish undisciplined students, so as to discourage them from disrupting the class atmosphere in the future,” Clavien and her colleagues note.

So while the participating prospective teachers weren’t personally hurt by the violinist’s behavior, they could easily imagine themselves dealing with a similar situation, and were thus more likely to punish such disruptive activity. We may conceive of morality as a set of relatively rigid rules, but when it comes to actual enforcement, context matters—a lot.

It all offers fodder for a new hybrid genre of reality TV. Anyone for American Idol meets Judge Judy?

Tom Jacobs
Staff writer Tom Jacobs is a veteran journalist with more than 20 years experience at daily newspapers. He has served as a staff writer for The Los Angeles Daily News and the Santa Barbara News-Press. His work has also appeared in The Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and Ventura County Star.

More From Tom Jacobs

Tags: ,

If you would like to comment on this post, or anything else on Pacific Standard, visit our Facebook or Google+ page, or send us a message on Twitter. You can also follow our regular updates and other stories on both LinkedIn and Tumblr.

A weekly roundup of the best of Pacific Standard and PSmag.com, delivered straight to your inbox.

Follow us


Subscribe Now

Quick Studies

What Makes You Neurotic?

A new study gets to the root of our anxieties.

Fecal Donor Banks Are Possible and Could Save Lives

Defrosted fecal matter can be gross to talk about, but the benefits are too remarkable to tiptoe around.

How Junk Food Companies Manipulate Your Tongue

We mistakenly think that harder foods contain fewer calories, and those mistakes can affect our belt sizes.

What Steve Jobs’ Death Teaches Us About Public Health

Studies have shown that when public figures die from disease, the public takes notice. New research suggests this could be the key to reaching those who are most at risk.

Speed-Reading Apps Will Not Revolutionize Anything, Except Your Understanding

The one-word-at-a-time presentation eliminates the eye movements that help you comprehend what you're reading.

The Big One

One state—Pennsylvania—logs 52 percent of all sales, shipments, and receipts for the chocolate manufacturing industry. March/April 2014