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.