Pain on Purpose Hurts More

A study in the journal Psychological Science finds that the exact same electrical shock is more painful if the recipient thinks it was done on purpose rather than by accident. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

When it comes to pain, it’s the thought that counts. Because pain hurts more when it’s inflicted on purpose. Or so say researchers from Harvard University in the December issue of Psychological Science.

Forty-three people were paired off with a partner for what they were told would be a test of psychological perception. Then they were hooked up to some electrodes, and given a quick zap. Sometimes the shock was “intentional.” So, the partner would call for a shock to be administered, and zzzt it came. But sometimes the shock was unintentional. That is, the partner called for the subject to hear a pleasant tone, but those zap-happy researchers hit the shock button instead.

They then asked the subjects to rate the pain. The results? On a scale of one to seven, with seven being “extremely uncomfortable,” the shocks that were done on purpose rated a respectable 3.6. But the same exact shock when given by accident only rated a 3.

That emotional response to pain makes evolutionary sense, the researchers say. Because an ouch that’s just an accident is probably one-time thing. Whereas someone who wants to do you harm will probably do it again. In which case it may be a good idea to pull off your electrodes and just go home.

—Karen Hopkin 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast:

RSS | iTunes 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe