Are Subjective Evaluations Biased by Social Factors or Connections? An Econometric Analysis of Soccer Referee Decisions

Scoppa, Vincenzo (2008): Are Subjective Evaluations Biased by Social Factors or Connections? An Econometric Analysis of Soccer Referee Decisions.

Abstract

Many incentive contracts are based on subjective evaluations and contractual disputes depend on judges’ decisions. However, subjective evaluations raise risks of favouritism and distortions. Sport contests are a fruitful field for testing empirically theories of incentives. In this paper the behaviour of the referees in the Italian soccer (football) league (“Serie A”) is analyzed. Using data on injury (or extra) time subjectively assigned by the referee at the end of the match and controlling for factors which may influence it (players substitutions, yellow and red cards, penalty kicks, etc.), we show that referees are biased in favour of home team, in that injury time is significantly greater if home teams are losing. The refereeing bias increases greatly when there is no running track in the stadium and the crowd is close to the pitch. Following the 2006 “Serie A” scandal we test whether favouritism emerges towards teams suspected of connections with referees finding that these teams obtain favourable decisions. Social pressure by the crowd attending the match however appears to be the main cause of favouritism.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Favoritism, Subjective evaluation; Sport economics; Soccer; Referee bias
• Subjects: L - Industrial Organization > L8 - Industry Studies: Services > L83 - Sports ; Gambling ; Restaurants ; Recreation ; Tourism; Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics ; Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology > Z13 - Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology ; Social and Economic Stratification; M - Business Administration and Business Economics ; Marketing ; Accounting ; Personnel Economics > M5 - Personnel Economics > M50 - General

References

Akerlof, G. (1980), “A Theory of Social Custom, of Which Unemployment May Be One Consequence,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 94 (June 1980), 749–775.

Baroncelli, A., Lago, U., (2006), “Italian Football”, Journal of Sports Economics, 7, 1, pp. 13-28.

Becker, G. and Murphy K. M. (2000), Social Economics: Market Behavior in a Social Environment (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000).

Bernheim, D. (1994), “A Theory of Conformity,” Journal of Political Economy, 102, pp. 841–877.

Carmichael, F. and Thomas, D. (2005), “Home-Field Effect and Team Performance”, Journal of Sports Economics, 6, 3, pp. 264-81.

Chiappori, P., Levitt, S., Groseclose, T. (2002), “Testing Mixed-Strategy Equilibria When Players Are Heterogeneous: The Case of Penalty Kicks in Soccer”, American Economic Review, 92, 4, pp. 1138-1151.

Dohmen, T. (2005), “Social Pressure Influences Decisions of Individuals. Evidence from the Behavior of Football Referees”, IZA Discussion Paper, No. 1595.

Duggan, M., Levitt, S. (2002), “Winning Isn’t Everything: Corruption in Sumo Wrestling”, American Economic Review, 92, 5, pp. 1594-1605.

Ehrenberg R. and Bognanno, M. (1990), “Do Tournaments Have Incentive Effects”, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 6, pp. 1307-1324.

Garicano, L., Palacios-Huerta, I. and Prendergast, C. (2001), “Favouritism under Social Pressure”, Working Paper NBER, No. 8376.

Garicano, L., Palacios-Huerta, I. and Prendergast, C. (2005), “Favouritism under Social Pressure”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(2), pp. 208–216.

Ichino, A., Polo, M., Rettore, E. (2003), “Are Judges Biased by Labor Market Conditions”, European Economic Review, 47, pp. 913-944.

Milgrom, P., (1988), “Employment Contracts, Influence Activities, and Efficient Organization Design”, Journal of Political Economy, 96, pp. 42-60.

Neale, W. (1964), “The Peculiar Economics of Professional Sport”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 78, 1, pp. 1–14.

Nevill, A., Balmer, N. and Williams, M. (1999), “Crowd influence on decisions in association football”, The Lancet 353, 1416.

Nevill, A.M., Balmer, N.J. and Williams, A.M. (2002), “The influence of crowd noise and experience upon refereeing decisions in football”, Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 3, 261-272.

Nevill, A.M., Newell S. and Gale, S. (1996), “Factors associated with home advantage in English and Scottish Soccer”, Journal of Sports Sciences, 14, 181-186.

Posner, R., (1993), “What do Judges and Justices Maximize? The Same Thing Everybody Else Does”, Supreme Court Economic Review, 3, pp. 1-41.

Prendergast, C. (1999), “The Provision of Incentives in Firms”, Journal of Economic Literature, 37, pp. 7–63.

Prendergast, C., and Topel, R., (1996), “Favouritism in Organizations”, Journal of Political Economy, 104, pp. 958–978.

Sutter, M., and Kocher, M. G. (2002), “Favoritism of agents – The case of referees’ home bias”. Papers on Strategic Interaction 28/2002, Max-Planck-Institute for Research in Economic Systems, Jena.

Sutter, M., and Kocher, M. (2004), “Favouritism of Agents: The Case of Referees' Home Bias”, Journal of Economic Psychology, 25, pp. 461–469.

Szymanski, S. (2003a), “The Assessment: The Economics of Sport”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19, 4, pp. 467-477.

Szymanski, S. (2003b), “The Economic Design of Sporting Contests”, Journal of Economic Literature, 41, 4, pp. 1137-1187.

Tirole, J., (1992), “Collusion and the Theory of Organizations”, in Laffont, J. J., ed., Advances in Economic Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 151-206.

Tirole, J., (1999), “Incomplete Contracts: Where do we Stand?”, Econometrica, vol. 67, n. 4, pp. 741-81.

Walker, M., Wooders, J., (2001), “Minimax Play at Wimbledon”, American Economic Review, 91, 5, pp. 1521–38.

Wallsten, T. and Barton, C. (1982). “Processing probabilistic multidimensional information for decisions”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 8, pp. 361–384.