Intentionality Matters for Third-Party Punishment but not Compensation in Trust Games

We investigate how the intentionality of investors or trustees’ actions affects thirdparty compensation and punishment interventions after a trust game. Investorsand trustees are randomly assigned to conditions where they either makeintentional choices or their choices are made by a random machine. Overall, wefind that lack of reciprocity is punished more than lack of trust, and third partiesexhibit strong preferences for compensation over punishment. We find that onlythe punishment choice is affected by the intentionality of parties’ actions, whereascompensation occurs in all conditions, whether lack of trust or reciprocity has beenintentional or unintentional