Since 2011, the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing (NASCAR) has forced drivers to pick one of three national series for which they would be eligible to compete for a season championship. Prior to this “Pick-A-Series” rule, many drivers in the premier Sprint Cup Series competed regularly in the Nationwide Series, which is a developmental division for less experienced drivers. I examined whether the removal of moonlighting Sprint Cup drivers from championship contention encouraged less aggressive driving among those who competed exclusively in the Nationwide Series. There was weak evidence that the Pick-A-Series rule reduced accident proneness among Nationwide drivers relative to Sprint Cup drivers.
BaucusM.NortonW. I.Jr.Davis-SramekB.MeekW. (2008). Cheating and NASCAR: Who’s at the wheel?Business Horizons, 51, 379–389. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2008.03.001
2.
BeckerB. E.HuselidM. A. (1992). The incentive effects of tournament compensation systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 336–350. doi:10.2307/2393228
3.
BlountT. (2009). The Blount report: NASCAR’s most overrated & underrated drivers, cars, teams, and tracks. Chicago, IL: Triumph Books.
BothnerM. S.KangJ. H.StuartT. E. (2007). Competitive crowding and risk taking in a tournament: Evidence from NASCAR racing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 208–247. doi:10.2189/asqu.52.2.208
6.
ConnellyB. L.TihanyiL.CrookT. R.GangloffK. A. (2014). Tournament theory: Thirty years of contests and competitions. Journal of Management, 40, 16–47. doi:10.1177/0149206313498902
7.
DeckA.DeckC.ZhuZ. (2014). Decision making in a sequential game: The case of pitting in NASCAR. Journal of Sports Economics, 15, 132–149. doi:10.1177/1527002512443828
8.
DepkinII, C. A.WilsonD. P. (2004). The efficiency of the NASCAR reward system: Initial empirical evidence. Journal of Sports Economics, 5, 371–386. doi:10.1177/1527002503260559
9.
DoleC. A. (2007). Risk taking in NASCAR: An examination of compensating behavior and tournament theory in racing. Journal of Economics and Economic Education Research, 8, 47–64. Retrieved fromhttp://www.alliedacademies.org/Public/Journals/Journals.aspx
GroothuisP. A.GroothuisJ. D.RotthoffK. W. (2011). Time on camera: An additional explanation of NASCAR tournaments. Journal of Sports Economics, 12, 562–570. doi:10.1177/1527002510385910
12.
HorraceW. C.OaxacaR. L. (2006). Results on the bias and inconsistency of ordinary least squares for the linear probability model. Economics Letters, 90, 321–327. doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2005.08.024
13.
LancasterT. (2000). The incidental parameter problem since 1948. Journal of Econometrics, 95, 391–413. doi:10.1016/S0304-4076(99)00044-5
14.
LazearE. P.RosenS. (1981). Rank-order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. Journal of Political Economy, 89, 841–864. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1830810
15.
NeymanJ.ScottE. L. (1948). Consistent estimation from partially consistent observations. Econometrica, 16, 1–32. doi:10.2307/1914288
PopeA. T.TollisonR. D. (2010). “Rubbin’ is racin’”: Evidence of the Peltzman effect from NASCAR. Public Choice, 142, 507–513. doi:10.1007/s11127-009-9548-2
18.
SchwartzJ. T.IsaacsJ. P.CarilliA. M. (2007). To race or to place?: An empirical investigation of the efficiency of the NASCAR points competition. Journal of Sports Economics, 8, 633–641. doi:10.1177/1527002506294944
19.
SobelR. S.NesbitT. M. (2007). Automobile safety regulation and the incentive to drive recklessly: Evidence from NASCAR. Southern Economic Journal, 74, 71–84. doi:10.2307/20111953
20.
SzymanskiS. (2003). The economics design of sporting contests. Journal of Economic Literature, 41, 1137–1187. doi:10.1257/002205103771800004
21.
von AllmenP. (2001). Is the reward system in NASCAR efficient?Journal of Sports Economics, 2, 62–79. doi:10.117/1527002501002001 06
22.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
