Cited by 238Labor Movements and UnionsConflict Management and NegotiationLabor market dynamics and wage inequality

Choosing the Wrong Pond: Social Comparisons in Negotiations That Reflect a Self-Serving Bias

Babcock, L., Wang, X., Loewenstein, G.·1996·The Quarterly Journal of Economics

Abstract

We explore the role that choice of comparison groups plays in explaining impasse in teacher contract negotiations. We hypothesize that the negotiators select “comparable” districts in a biased fashion such that teachers' salaries in districts that unions view as comparable are higher than teachers' salaries in districts that school boards view as comparable. We also predict that strike activity is positively related to the difference in the salary levels of the unions' and boards' lists of comparables. We test these predictions using a unique combination of subjective survey and field data on teacher contract negotiations in Pennsylvania. Both hypotheses are supported by the data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2946655

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the Pennsylvania teacher negotiations field study, both sides listed about the same number of comparable districts (about 4.5).

    “Considering only the districts in which both the union and school board returned the survey, we found that both sides listed about the same number of districts as being comparable (about 4.5).”

    From Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases (1997) · cites this paper as Babcock, Wang and Loewenstein, 1996

  • The response rate for returning the survey was 57 percent for the union presidents and 35 percent for the school board presidents.

    “The response rate for returning the survey was 57 percent for the union presidents and 35 percent for the school board presidents.”

    From Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases (1997) · cites this paper as Babcock, Wang and Loewenstein (1996)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Babcock, L., Wang, X., & Loewenstein, G.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
The Quarterly Journal of Economics
Published
1996-02-01
Volume
111
Issue
1
Pages
1-19
ISSN
  • 0033-5533 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-4650
OpenAlex
W1979776678
Cited by
238
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 14
FWCI
19.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Quarterly Journal of Economics (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Labor Movements and Unions
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Conflict Management and Negotiation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
Keywords
social comparison, self-serving bias, comparison group selection, teacher salaries, strike activity, trade unions, school boards, negotiation impasse, Pennsylvania

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review