The influence of crowd noise and experience upon refereeing decisions in football

By Alan Nevill, N. Balmer, A. Mark Williams. 2002

553 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Gender Studies, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0fd50a4d7d819b290fe20596d8581af1df6a84b1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Gender Studies

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Does the Home Advantage Depend on Crowd Support? Evidence From Same-Stadium Derbies (2018, background): “awarding more penalties and less disciplinary sanctions to the home team or conceding more injury time to it when is behind (Nevill et al. 2002; Garicano et al., 2005; Dohmen, 2008; Sutter and Kocher, 2004; Scoppa, 2008; Dawson and Dobson, 2010; Page and Page, 2010).”
Time is money - Time pressure, incentives, and the quality of decision-making (2006, background): “7 Nevill et al. (2002) or Sutter and Kocher (2004), for instance, have shown that soccer referees are heavily influenced by the crowd noise in the stadium when making decisions on fouls, penalties or extra time.”
Home Advantage in Football: A Current Review of an Unsolved Puzzle (2008, background): “The bias was then demonstrated in a laboratory setting [27,28] and subsequently by returning to referee decisions after carefully controlling for confounding variables [10,29-32].”
Physical performance and decision making in association football referees: a naturalistic study (2009, background): “For example there is some compelling evidence that referee bias contributes to home advantage in football [20, 21].”
The 12th man?: refereeing bias in English and German soccer (2010, methodology): “Nevill et al. (2002) performed an experiment in which two sets of referees viewed a videotape of a Premiership match under different conditions and were asked to nominate award of free kicks.”
Eliminating Supportive Crowds Reduces Referee Bias (2021, background): “In an experimental setting using qualified English referees, Nevill et al. (2002) found that background noise significantly affected judgements of what constituted foul play, with decisions becoming less certain and increased bias toward the home team.”
The Influence of Social Forces: Evidence from the Behavior of Football Referees (2008, result): “Consistent with that explanation, Nevill, Balmer, and Williams (2002) have provided experimental evidence that soccer referees are affected by the crowd’s noise.”
Favoritism of agents - The case of referees' home bias (2003, background): “Nevill and Holder (1999) discuss four major factors which might explain the home advantage: rules, learning/familiarity, travel factors and crowd factors.”
Cognitive modeling of decision making in sports (2006, background): “In sports, the use of various heuristic strategies has been documented among athletes (Johnson & Raab, 2003), judges (Plessner, 1999) and referees ( Nevill, Balmer, & Williams, 2002 ).”
The Home Field Advantage in Athletics: A Meta‐Analysis (2010, background): “As mentioned previously, referees can be biased to call fewer fouls on the home team under crowd noise conditions (Nevill et al., 2002).”
Perceptual Judgments of Sports Officials are Influenced by their Motor and Visual Experience (2012, background): “Due to the results found by Nevill et al. (2002), we also considered the possibility of nonlinear relations.”
Behavior Under Social Pressure: Empty Italian Stadiums and Referee Bias (2010, unknown): “For example, Price and Wolfers (2007) find evidence of racial discrimination among NBA referees while Garicano et al.”