We analyze how reputational concerns of arbitrators affect the quality of their decision making. We assume that arbitrators differ in their ability to evaluate the correct decision and that information acquisition by arbitrators is costly and unobservable. We show that reputational concerns increase incentives for information acquisition but may induce the arbitrator to bias his decision towards one party in the dispute.This decision bias is greater when the dispute is confidential rather than when it is public, and the parties are more likely to choose confidentiality for less complex subject matters. In light of these results, we study the circumstances under which the parties to a contract choose to employ arbitration, rather than litigation in court, to resolve their disputes. We show that arbiration is more likely to be chosen by symmetric and long-lived parties.enough.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Economics and Finance Section, School of Social Sciences, Brunel University in its series Economics and Finance Discussion Papers with number
06-09.
Length: 29 pages Date of creation: Mar 2006 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:bru:bruedp:06-09
Contact details of provider: Postal: Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, UK
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (John.Hunter).
Related research
Keywords:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: