Decision-maker beliefs and the sunk-cost fallacy: Major League Baseball’s final-offer salary arbitration and utilization

2019 ◽  
Vol 75 ◽  
pp. 102080 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quinn A.W. Keefer
1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Hadley ◽  
Elizabeth Gustafson

Earnings equations are estimated for major league baseball hitters and pitchers using salary data for the 1989 season. The results indicate that final-offer salary arbitration and long-term contracts have a large positive impact on salaries. The impact of free-agency eligibility is also positive, but smaller man arbitration eligibility. This implies that some players have used the arbitration process to extract above-market salaries. Therefore it is concluded that it would be in the interest of the owners to replace arbitration with earlier eligibility for free agency.


ILR Review ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 697-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Faurot ◽  
Stephen McAllister

Two assumptions in this analysis of baseball salary arbitration are that (1) players and clubs, to serve their interests in pre-arbitration negotiation, submit final offers to maximize and minimize, respectively, the expected value of the arbitrator's decision, and (2) arbitrators whose decisions are predictably biased are not appointed to settle player disputes, because such arbitrators are vetoed by one or the other side. These assumptions allow the authors to estimate the effects of several variables on arbitrators' decisions in 1984–91 cases. They find statistically significant effects for four variables that the industry's collective bargaining agreement identifies as matters arbitrators should consider—the player's performance during the previous season, the length and consistency of the player's career performance, previous compensation, and the club's recent performance—and for one variable not mentioned in that agreement—player position.


ILR Review ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 697 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Faurot ◽  
Stephen McAllister

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 533-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. RICHARD HILL ◽  
NICHOLAS A. JOLLY

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 35-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandeep Baliga ◽  
Jeffrey C Ely

We offer a theory of the sunk cost fallacy as an optimal response to limited memory. As new information arrives, a decision-maker may not remember all the reasons he began a project. The sunk cost gives additional information about future profits and informs subsequent decisions. The Concorde effect makes the investor more eager to complete projects when sunk costs are high and the pro-rata effect makes the investor less eager. In a controlled experiment we had subjects play a simple version of the model. In a baseline treatment subjects exhibit the pro-rata bias. When we induce memory constraints the effect reverses and the subjects exhibit the Concorde bias. (JEL D24, D83, G31)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document