Public pressure to take punitive action against human rights violators is often a driving force behind international sanctions. However, we know little about the way in which public support is shaped by varying types of abuse, the costs and effectiveness of sanctions and the differential harm they inflict upon the target population and leadership. Our study specifically addresses this gap by unpicking contextual factors that jointly sway the perception of morality and the cost-benefit calculus. We propose that there is no simple trade-off between instrumental and moral concerns. The context within which violations take place and the interactions between moral and instrumental dimensions shape preference formation. Findings from our paired conjoint experiment suggest that whether respondents support imposing sanctions depends on the category of human rights abuse and its perceived salience. Individuals also prefer sheltering the target population while punishing the leadership, but collective punishment becomes less unacceptable if the majority of the target population support the human rights infringements. The desire to do something against the perpetrators amplifies the appeal of punishing the leadership but assuages the moral concerns of harming the population.

中文翻译：

---

侵犯人权行为和公众对制裁的支持

对侵犯人权者采取惩罚行动的公众压力往往是国际制裁背后的推动力。然而，我们对不同类型的滥用行为如何形成公众支持、制裁的成本和有效性以及制裁对目标人群和领导层造成的不同伤害知之甚少。我们的研究通过剔除共同影响道德观念和成本效益计算的背景因素来专门解决这一差距。我们认为，工具性问题和道德性问题之间不存在简单的权衡。违法行为发生的背景以及道德和工具维度之间的相互作用塑造了偏好的形成。我们配对联合实验的结果表明，受访者是否支持实施制裁取决于侵犯人权的类别及其感知的显着性。个人也更愿意在惩罚领导层的同时庇护目标人群，但如果大多数目标人群支持侵犯人权行为，集体惩罚就会变得不那么令人难以接受。对肇事者采取行动的愿望增强了惩罚领导层的吸引力，但也减轻了对伤害民众的道德担忧。