IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/doi10.1086-669717.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Information about Arbitrators' Win/Loss Ratios Improve Their Accuracy?

Author

Listed:
  • Alon Klement
  • Zvika Neeman

Abstract

This paper examines how providing litigants with information about arbitrators' win/loss ratios affects arbitrators' incentives in deciding the cases before them in an impartial and unbiased manner. We show that if litigants are informed about arbitrators' past decisions, then arbitrators might want to make an incorrect decision when a correct decision would raise the suspicion that they are biased. Therefore, providing information about arbitrators' past decisions might create adverse incentive effects and reduce the accuracy of arbitration. We compare the accuracy of arbitrators' decisions under different arbitrator selection procedures and discuss the implications for the design of arbitration rules by arbitration and dispute resolution providers and by court-administered arbitration programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Alon Klement & Zvika Neeman, 2013. "Does Information about Arbitrators' Win/Loss Ratios Improve Their Accuracy?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(2), pages 369-397.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/669717
    DOI: 10.1086/669717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/669717
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/669717
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/669717?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:fth:prinin:163 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jeffrey C. Ely & Juuso Välimäki, 2003. "Bad Reputation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 785-814.
    3. Orley Ashenfelter & Gordon B. Dahl, 2012. "Bargaining and the Role of Expert Agents: An Empirical Study of Final-Offer Arbitration," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 116-132, February.
    4. Stephen Morris, 2001. "Political Correctness," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(2), pages 231-265, April.
    5. Kreps, David M. & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Reputation and imperfect information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 253-279, August.
    6. Bloom, David E, 1986. "Empirical Models of Arbitrator Behavior under Conventional Arbitration," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 578-585, November.
    7. Bloom, David E & Cavanagh, Christopher L, 1986. "An Analysis of the Selection of Arbitrators," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(3), pages 408-422, June.
    8. Stephen J. Choi & Jill E. Fisch & A. C. Pritchard, 2010. "Attorneys as Arbitrators," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 109-157, January.
    9. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1982. "Predation, reputation, and entry deterrence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 280-312, August.
    10. Glenn C. Loury, 1994. "Self-Censorship in Public Discourse," Rationality and Society, , vol. 6(4), pages 428-461, October.
    11. Orley Ashenfelter & David Bloom, 1983. "The Pitfalls in Judging Arbitrator Impartiality by Win-Loss Tallies Under Final-Offer Arbitration," Working Papers 543, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    12. Orley Ashenfelter & David Bloom, 1983. "The Pitfalls in Judging Arbitrator Impartiality by Win-Loss Tallies Under Final-Offer Arbitration," Working Papers 543, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Gershoni, Naomi, 2021. "Individual vs. group decision-making: Evidence from a natural experiment in arbitration proceedings," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    2. Alma Cohen & Alon Klement & Zvika Neeman, 2015. "Judicial Decision Making: A Dynamic Reputation Approach," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 133-159.
    3. Rao, Weijia, 2021. "Are arbitrators biased in ICSID arbitration? A dynamic perspective," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    4. Benjamin Balzer & Johannes Schneider, 2021. "Managing a conflict: optimal alternative dispute resolution," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(2), pages 415-445, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Klement, Alon & Neeman, Zvika, 2012. "Does Information about Arbitrators’Win/Loss Ratios Improve Their Accuracy?," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275786, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Ely, Jeffrey & Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David K., 2008. "When is reputation bad?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 498-526, July.
    3. Bruno Jullien & In-Uck Park, 2009. "Seller Reputation and Trust in Pre-Trade Communication," Levine's Working Paper Archive 814577000000000330, David K. Levine.
    4. Mailath, George J. & Samuelson, Larry, 2015. "Reputations in Repeated Games," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    5. Junghun Cho, 2006. "Multiple Advisors with Reputation," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp314, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    6. Klement, Alon & Neeman, Zvika, 2011. "Private Selection and Arbitration Neutrality," Working Paper Series 4074, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    7. repec:vuw:vuwscr:19179 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Klement, Alon & Neeman, Zvika, 2011. "Private Selection and Arbitration Neutrality," Working Paper Series 19179, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    9. Junghun Cho, 2008. "Sequential Cheap Talk from Advisors with Reputation," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp352, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    10. Sonin, Konstantin & Egorov, Georgy, 2005. "The Killing Game: Reputation and Knowledge in Non-Democratic Succession," CEPR Discussion Papers 5092, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Jeffrey C. Ely & Juuso Välimäki, 2003. "Bad Reputation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 785-814.
    12. Benjamin Sperisen, 2018. "Bad Reputation Under Bounded And Fading Memory," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 138-157, January.
    13. Harasser, Andreas, 2014. "Information asymmetry and reentry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 118-121.
    14. Jullien, Bruno & Park, In-Uck, 2019. "Communication, Feedbacks and Repeated Moral Hazard with Short-lived Buyers," TSE Working Papers 19-1027, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Apr 2020.
    15. Sedlacek, Sabine & Maier, Gunther, 2012. "Can green building councils serve as third party governance institutions? An economic and institutional analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 479-487.
    16. Chee Leong, 2012. "A Dynamic Game of Reputation and Economic Performances in Nondemocratic Regimes," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 385-400, December.
    17. Xiaojing Meng, 2015. "Analyst Reputation, Communication, and Information Acquisition," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 119-173, March.
    18. Wrasai, Phongthorn & Swank, Otto H., 2007. "Policy makers, advisers, and reputation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 579-590, April.
    19. Georgy Egorov & Konstantin Sonin, 2005. "The Killing Game: Reputation and Knowledge in Politics of Succession," Game Theory and Information 0505003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Olszewski, Wojciech, 2004. "Informal communication," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 180-200, August.
    21. Zhaohui Chen & Alan D. Morrison & William J. Wilhelm Jr., 2014. "Investment Bank Reputation and “Star” Cultures," The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 2(2), pages 129-153.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/669717. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    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.