Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1974. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Even though penalty policies have been adopted as airlines marketing strategies, little academic literature is found. Popular industries which were investigated for penalty policies include cell phone, credit card, hotel, airlines, bank, college, retail store, restaurant, and day care service companies. Notwithstanding the penalty policies commonly adopted in the airline industry, literature for airlines penalty policies is difficult to find and no literature exists to examine the impact of penalties based upon actual data from airlines. This study is the first research to investigate the impact of the penalty policy of airlines concerning the re-purchase behaviour of penalized customers by the actual data collected in the airline company. In this study, a total of 200 cases of data were collected from the airport authority and an international airline company in South Korea. The collected data were reviewed and categorized by demographic factors of customers including gender, and age; by the relationship with the airlines such as customer membership status of the airline loyalty programme; and by the results of the penalty resolution process such as whether the penalty was waived, the reasons for complaints concerning penalty charges, and the results of customers’ repurchase behaviour. To identify the reasons for customer complaints concerning imposing a penalty, all cases of complaints were reviewed and categorized. Attributes of the penalty and concept of perceived justice theory composed of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice were used to understand which factors play a key influential role in customer re-purchase behaviour. According to coding the table, the categorized data were coded and tested by parametric analysis (logistic regression model) in SPSS 20 program and ANOVA. As a result of the research, the customers’ loyalty programme membership status has been shown to positively influenced the re-purchase behaviour. The factors concerning penalty amount and severity (related to distribution justice) negatively affect customer re-purchase behaviour. The other factors are indicated as not significant to customer re-purchase behaviour. This study suggests that the valuable idea from the impact of penalty for the re-purchase behaviour should be considered by airline executives who should build more effective penalty policies. Especially, imposing a penalty amount is considered as one of the most significant factors affecting the perception of fairness and customer intention to raise complaints. In addition to the penalty amount, the airline loyalty programme membership status has to be considered as a key factor to maintain customer loyalty where penalties have been imposed.

Although the literature in the field of criminal justice and philosophy is full of ideas of what constitutes "justice," little to nothing has been done to see where the average individual's opinion falls in relation to these ideas. This paper analyzes a cross-sectional convenience sample of students at UCF to determine their preference of six models of justice: utilitarianism, contractarianism, fairness, retributivism, moralism, and libertarianism. Correlating demographic factors are also discussed.

Thesis (Ph.D. (Human resources management))-University of Pretoria, 2004. / Summary in English. Includes bibliographical references. Available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.

Values matter in both legal decision (lawmaking and lawapplying) and discourse (lawshaping and lawinfluencing). Yet, their purported subjectivity means that gaining or improving knowledge about values (whether they be epistemic, legal, moral, ethical, economic, political, cultural, social, or religious) in the context of analytic legal thought and understanding is often said to be at odds with its goal of objectivity. This phenomenon is amplified at the international level where the infusion of seemingly subjective political values by sovereigns, and the decisionmakers to whom they delegate, can, and does, interfere with an idealized and objective rule of law. The discourse on value subjectivity, and its relation to the purpose and function of the law, is particularly apparent in evolving international legal orders such as investment treaty arbitration. The primary aim of this work is to provide a new method for gaining empirical knowledge about value subjectivity that can help close a weak link in all nonpositivist (value-laden) legal theory: a weakness that has manifest itself as skepticism about the possibility of measuring value objectively enough to permit its incorporation as a necessary component of analytic jurisprudence. This work proposes a theory of configurative fairness for addressing the problem related to the development or evolution of legal regimes, and how legal regimes perceived as subjectively unfair can be remedied. Such a theory accepts the premise that perceptions of fairness matter in directing the way that legal orders develop, and that perceptions of fairness relate to the manner in which values are distributed and maximized in particular legal orders. It is posited that legal orders perceived as fair by their participants are more likely to be endorsed or accepted as legally binding (and are therefore more likely to comply with the processes and outcomes that such laws mandate). The purpose of a theory of configurative fairness is an attempt to provide a methodological bridge for improving knowledge about value in the context of legal inquiry through the employment of a technique called Q methodology: an epistemological and empirical means for the measurement and mapping of human subjectivity. It is a method that was developed in the early twentieth century by physicist-psychologist William Stephenson: the last research student of the inventor of factor analysis, Charles Spearman. What Stephenson did was to create a way for systematically measuring subjective perspectives, and although not previously used in jurisprudential thought, Q methodology will facilitate a means for the description and evaluation of shared subjectivities. In the context of law generally, and in investment treaty arbitration specifically, these are the subjectivities that manifest themselves as the conflicting perspectives about value that are omnipresent in both communicative lawshaping discourse and authoritative and controlling lawmaking and lawapplying decision. Knowledge about these shared value subjectivities among participants in investment treaty arbitration will allow the legal analyst to delineate and clarify points of overlapping consensus about the desired distribution of value as they relate to the regime-building issues of evolving legal orders. The focus for a theory of configurative fairness pertains to the identification of the various value positions that participants hold about a particular legal order and to configure those values, through its rules and principles, in a manner that is acceptable (and perceived as fair) by all of its participants. If such a value consensus can be identified, then particular rules in the legal order can be configured by decisionmakers in a way so as to satisfy participants’ shared value understandings. To engage such a theory, a means for identifying shared value subjectivities must be delineated. This work conducts a Q method study on the issues under debate relating to regime-building questions in investment treaty arbitration. The Q method study asked participants knowledgeable about investment treaty arbitration to rank-order a set of statements about the way that the values embraced by this legal order ought to be configured. The results of the study demonstrate that there is significant overlap about how participants in investment treaty arbitration perceive the desired distribution of values across the regime. The Q method study identified six distinct perspectives that represent shared subjectivities about value in the context of the development of investment treaty arbitration. The Q method study was also able to identify where there is an overlapping consensus about value distribution across the distinct perspectives. It is these areas of overlapping consensus that are most likely to reflect shared value understandings, and it is proposed that it is upon these shared value understandings that the future development of investment treaty arbitration ought to aim.