Attribution Theory and Discipline Arbitration

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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.