Can we become peaceful only by taking revenge? According to social psychologist Kevin Carlsmith of Colgate, the reason
for revenge is to achieve catharsis.
However, his recent study suggests that revenge is, in fact, counterproductive to achieving that goal. The study explains that those who seek to punish continue to think about the perpetrator, keeping the pain and the anger is very much alive in their minds, while those who "move on" or "get over it" think less about the perpetrator. He was associated with Colgate University. Last year, he died from cancer at the age of 44 years. His one research is very popular: The Paradoxical Consequences of Revenge.
Carlsmith's team tested this theory by staging an interactive game where players could earn money if they all cooperated with one another. However, if a player did not cooperate, he could earn more at the expense of the others. Researchers planted certain "free riders" who would encourage everyone else to cooperate but would later not cooperate himself. Two groups were tested--one that could punish the "free rider" (and they all did), and one that could not punish.
Interestingly, the results showed that revenge was not as sweet as it sounds. The punishers reported feeling worse than the non-punishers but also predicted that they would have felt far worse if they hadn't been able to punish. On the other hand, the non-punishers, the happier the group believed that they would have been happier if they had the opportunity to seek revenge against the "free rider."
What does this all mean?
Carlsmith said, "Rather than providing closure, it does the opposite: It keeps the wound open and fresh."
He suggests that when we don't get revenge, we can trivialize the event. We are able to tell ourselves that because we didn't go crazy (hacking away our boyfriend's body parts), it wasn't the end of the world, after all. That way, it's easier to move on.
However, his recent study suggests that revenge is, in fact, counterproductive to achieving that goal. The study explains that those who seek to punish continue to think about the perpetrator, keeping the pain and the anger is very much alive in their minds, while those who "move on" or "get over it" think less about the perpetrator. He was associated with Colgate University. Last year, he died from cancer at the age of 44 years. His one research is very popular: The Paradoxical Consequences of Revenge.
Carlsmith's team tested this theory by staging an interactive game where players could earn money if they all cooperated with one another. However, if a player did not cooperate, he could earn more at the expense of the others. Researchers planted certain "free riders" who would encourage everyone else to cooperate but would later not cooperate himself. Two groups were tested--one that could punish the "free rider" (and they all did), and one that could not punish.
Interestingly, the results showed that revenge was not as sweet as it sounds. The punishers reported feeling worse than the non-punishers but also predicted that they would have felt far worse if they hadn't been able to punish. On the other hand, the non-punishers, the happier the group believed that they would have been happier if they had the opportunity to seek revenge against the "free rider."
What does this all mean?
Carlsmith said, "Rather than providing closure, it does the opposite: It keeps the wound open and fresh."
He suggests that when we don't get revenge, we can trivialize the event. We are able to tell ourselves that because we didn't go crazy (hacking away our boyfriend's body parts), it wasn't the end of the world, after all. That way, it's easier to move on.
