The saying goes, “Vengeance Is A Dish Best Served Cold,” implying that delayed revenge is the most satisfying. However, new research from Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) suggests this might not be the case for most people. A recently published study in Motivation Science delves into the psychology of revenge and reveals a surprising preference for immediate retaliation over waiting for a potentially more impactful, but delayed, act of vengeance. This challenges the conventional wisdom and offers new insights into how we perceive and pursue revenge.
The study, titled “Some Revenge Now or More Revenge Later? Applying an Intertemporal Framework to Retaliatory Aggression,” conducted by researchers at VCU, explored the human inclination towards immediate versus delayed revenge through a series of six experiments involving over 1,500 participants. These experiments presented participants with choices between inflicting a smaller act of aggression immediately or a larger act of revenge that would be delayed. Across the board, the findings consistently pointed towards a preference for immediate vengeance.
Dr. David Chester, Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology at VCU and director of the Social Psychology and Neuroscience Lab, explains, “Our findings suggest that people prefer a ‘hot-and-ready’ form of revenge, instead of a cold, calculated and delayed approach to vengeance.” This indicates a fundamental human tendency to prioritize the immediacy of retaliatory action, even if it means settling for a less potent form of revenge in the moment.
While the study highlights the general preference for immediate revenge, it also uncovered factors that can shift this inclination towards delayed vengeance. Interestingly, when participants were prompted to dwell on past grievances and provocations – a process known as rumination – their preference began to tilt towards delayed-but-greater revenge. This suggests that focusing on past wrongs can fuel a desire for more significant, even if delayed, retribution.
Dr. Samuel West, a postdoctoral fellow with the Injury and Violence Prevention Program at VCU Health, elaborated on this shift, stating, “We were able to shift participant preferences toward the delayed-but-greater choices using various experimental provocations.” Furthermore, this preference for delayed revenge was also observed when participants were asked to consider real-life situations where they had been hurt by someone. Even in hypothetical scenarios, the tendency to favor delayed revenge emerged under specific conditions.
One experiment involved a video game scenario where participants could administer a noise blast to an opponent. They were given the choice between a softer, immediate noise blast or a louder blast the next day. Another experiment placed participants in a virtual chat room where they were intentionally excluded from conversations, after which they could choose how long an offending participant would have to endure holding their hand in painfully cold water. These varied experimental setups consistently revealed the underlying preference dynamics related to immediate versus delayed vengeance.
Interestingly, the study also revealed a correlation between the preference for delayed revenge and certain personality traits. Participants who showed a greater inclination towards delayed-but-greater revenge also exhibited higher levels of antagonistic traits such as sadism and angry rumination. This suggests that individuals with these personality characteristics might be more inclined to savor the anticipation and planning of a more substantial act of delayed vengeance, aligning more closely with the traditional notion of “vengeance is a dish best served cold.”
Dr. Chester notes that the general preference for immediate retaliation likely stems from a desire to deliver a swift and proportionate response to perceived wrongs, aiming to deter future provocations. This immediate response serves as a form of immediate justice, correcting perceived imbalances in social interactions.
However, he also points out the conditions under which “vengeance is a dish best served cold” does become relevant: “Yet when provocations become so severe that we ruminate about them over and over again, or when people provoke the ‘wrong person’ (i.e., a person with antagonistic personality traits), revenge may just become a dish best served cold.” In these specific cases, the desire for a more calculated and impactful revenge, served cold and deliberately, takes precedence.
This research is considered groundbreaking as it is believed to be the first systematic investigation into an intertemporal framework for aggression. By exploring the time dimension of revenge, the study offers valuable insights into the complexities of human aggression and antisocial behavior. It highlights that while immediate retaliation is often the default human response, the allure of delayed and amplified vengeance exists, particularly under conditions of rumination and in individuals with specific personality traits. Ultimately, the study reveals a nuanced understanding of revenge, suggesting that while the saying “vengeance is a dish best served cold” captures a certain aspect of human behavior, the reality is often more immediate and “hot-and-ready.”
