Previously, consent was usually obtained at the outset of the proceedings. The result of Opinion 11 was a decline in the numbers of awards published, a study of the issue, and in 1985, a modification aimed at increasing the numbers of consents while protecting the parties' confidentiality in some cases. The 3-page questionnaire was mailed to all 620 NAA members in June 1984. Two hundred and thirty-eight responded, of whom 130 were full-time arbitrators. Only half of the respondents were willing to submit some or any of their awards for publication. Those who were willing were most commonly motivated by their recognition of the educational contribution of published awards. Another common reason was the desire to aid the process of selecting arbitrators by letting the parties learn about arbitrators' positions on issues. The novelty of the issue or the reasoning involved or the interest of the factual situation were the main criteria for choosing an award to submit for publication. Opinion 11 was found to have some effect on reducing submissions for publication, but lack of funds was another major factor. A total of 101 respondents supported the interpretation of Opinion 11, while 119 opposed it. Findings indicated that the modification of the consent rules should increase the numbers of awards submitted for publication. Data tables and 13 footnotes.