Attribution Theory and Discipline Arbitration

Brian Bemmels

ILR Review, 1991, vol. 44, issue 3, 548-562

Abstract: This study focuses on 230 male arbitrators' decisions in a hypothetical discharge grievance case. An analysis of the responses supports the central proposition of attribution theory that a decision-maker's response to an individual's action largely depends on the decision-maker's attributions of causality or responsibility for the action. The analysis also shows that, all else equal, the arbitrators tended to specify a more lenient penalty when the grievant was female than when the grievant was male; and more experienced arbitrators tended to decide either completely in favor of the grievant or completely in favor of the employer, whereas less experienced arbitrators tended to make compromise decisions.

Date: 1991
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://ilr.sagepub.com/content/44/3/548.abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:ilrrev:v:44:y:1991:i:3:p:548-562

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in ILR Review from Cornell University, ILR School
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().