IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pri/indrel/284.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Comparison of Interest Arbitrator Decision-Making in Experimental and Field Settings

Author

Listed:
  • Craig A. Olson

    (Princeton University and University of Wisconsin-Madison)

  • Gregory G. Dell'Omo

    (Canisius College)

  • Paul Jarley

    (University of Iowa)

Abstract

Recent studies have investigated arbitrator decision rules in both experimental and field settings. The external validity of experimental studies is evaluated by comparing the decisions made in an experiment with those made in actual cases for a common group of arbitrators. The results show the decision models used in the two settings are very similar when the decision problem in the two settings is carefully controlled to be the same.

Suggested Citation

  • Craig A. Olson & Gregory G. Dell'Omo & Paul Jarley, 1991. "A Comparison of Interest Arbitrator Decision-Making in Experimental and Field Settings," Working Papers 664, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    • Handle: RePEc:pri:indrel:284
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dataspace.princeton.edu/bitstream/88435/dsp012v23vt376/1/284.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel R. Marburger & Paul L. Burgess, 2004. "Can Prior Offers and Arbitration Outcomes Be Used to Predict the Winners of Subsequent Final‐Offer Arbitration Cases?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(1), pages 93-102, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    interest arbitration; arbitrator decision-making; experimental economics; public sector bargaining;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pri:indrel:284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bobray Bordelon (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/irprius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.