Incentives for Post-Apprehension Self-Punishment: University Self-Sanctions for NCAA Infractions
This paper analyzes the financial incentives for entities to self-impose punishments post-apprehension but before the enforcement body imposes punishment. We argue that violators punish themselves in order to affect the level and type of total punishment. Violators may be able to choose the punishment that minimizes lost revenue. The model includes an enforcing body whose objective is to be perceived as fair by the public. We consider the case of university self-sanctions for National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) violations to test our self-punishment model using data from Division I schools’ major infractions of NCAA rules. The estimation results show that university self-imposed punishments can significantly affect the form or type of the final punishment they receive from the NCAA in response to a violation of NCAA rules.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 3 (2008)
Issue (Month): 4 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.fitinfotech.com/|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.fitinfotech.com/IJSF/IJSFbackissueWVU.tpl|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jsf:intjsf:v:3:y:2008:i:4:p:196-209. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Victor Matheson)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.