Guided by a review of the literature on goals of punishment, causal beliefs, and consequences of causal categorization, four studies were conducted. The first study explored whether reprimand for achievement failure and criminal punishment could be explained with identical attributional concepts. The second study examined whether teachers used the retributive-utilitarian distinction in their choice of disciplinary actions and whether punishment decisions were related to causal beliefs. The third study considered whether intervening psychological processes guiding punishment goals included causal beliefs, inferences of responsibility and emotional reactions and whether general philosophies about retribution and utilitarianism influenced decisions in specific contexts. The fourth study sought to determine whether principles derived from laboratory investigations could be extended to explain public reactions to criminal events and whether attributional concepts could be used in the public context to explain the endorsement of different utilitarian objectives. In general, study findings showed punishment goals were mediated by expectancies and affects elicited by causal beliefs. Purposes of punishment appeared to be more state-like than trait-like since they changed as a function of the reason for a transgression. The morality of retribution versus utilitarianism is discussed, and the authors suggest rehabilitation may be the most moral form of punishment. 32 references, 1 table, and 4 figures