FALL 2024

AUTHOR

Rivka Lipkovitz, Proof School

ABSTRACT

This study examines whether USA Fencing referees exhibit favoritism toward competitors from their designated regions, as frequent officiating within local areas could establish familiarity and potentially lead to unconscious bias. This issue is particularly relevant in foil and saber, where referees make subjective judgments on “right-of-way” during simultaneous hits, and in epee, where penalty decisions hold significant weight. Unlike other sports with subjective scoring that utilize referee panels, fencing relies on a single referee, granting them considerable control over bout outcomes. Despite the opportunity for prejudice, there are no studies of referee bias in fencing; this study aims to be the first to do so. Utilizing a substantial dataset of 35,111 Division I pool bouts from 2012 to 2019, I applied linear and logistic regression models to analyze the effect of regionality on score differentials and bout outcomes.

The results revealed limited evidence of regional bias, with nonsignificant negative effects in foil and saber and a minimal positive effect in epee. These findings diverge from similar studies in other sports, suggesting that regular referee-player interactions do not necessarily result in biased officiating. The minimal positive effect in epee suggests the need for further investigation into how decision-making may differ between scoring and penalty calls. Additionally, the findings highlight the necessity for more research on how referees’ relationships with players influence their judgments.