Mediation and Adjudication in Small Claims Court: The Effects of Process and Case Characteristics

Research examining the relative effectiveness of mediation and adjudication has raised questions about whether the apparent benefits of mediation can be attributed to differences in the two dispute resolution procedures or, instead, are due to differences in the characteristics of the disputes or disputants in the different procedures. Litigants in four small claims courts provided multiple comparison groups that enabled us to empirically examine case and process effects. Disputes and disputants in mediation and adjudication differed on few attributes. The process, outcomes, and impact of mediation and adjudication differed in ways generally consistent with their theoretical differences. Although the degree of liability admitted by the defendant played a role, overall, differences in the effectiveness of mediation and adjudication were due more to differences in the processes themselves than to differences in the disputes and disputants using each procedure.

[1]  Craig A. McEwen,et al.  Mediation : law, policy, practice , 1994 .

[2]  D. K. Kagehiro,et al.  Handbook of psychology and law , 1992 .

[3]  W. O'barr,et al.  Rules versus relationships : the ethnography of legal discourse , 1991 .

[4]  T. Tyler,et al.  In the Eye of the Beholder: Tort Litigants' Evaluations of Their Experiences in the Civil Justice System , 1990 .

[5]  T. Tyler.  The Quality of Dispute Resolution Processes and Outcomes: Measurement Problems and Possibilities , 1989 .

[6]  Craig A. McEwen,et al.  Coercion and Consent: A Tale of Two Court Reforms* , 1988 .

[7]  W. O'barr,et al.  LAY EXPECTATIONS OF THE CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM , 1988 .

[8]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. , 1988 .

[9]  Alison Taylor,et al.  Mediation: A Comprehensive Guide to Resolving Conflicts Without Litigation , 1986 .

[10]  Craig A. McEwen,et al.  The Relative Significance of Disputing Forum and Dispute Characteristics for Outcome and Compliance , 1986 .

[11]  D. G. Pruitt,et al.  Themes in the Mediation of Social Conflict , 1985 .

[12]  N. Vidmar.  An Assessment of Mediation in a Small Claims Court , 1985 .

[13]  Issues in Mediation: Rhetoric and Reality Revisited , 1985 .

[14]  W. O'barr,et al.  Litigant Satisfaction Versus Legal Adequacy in Small Claims Court Narratives , 1985 .

[15]  M. Goldstein,et al.  Multivariate Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1984 .

[16]  Blair H. Sheppard.  Third party conflict intervention: A procedural framework. , 1984 .

[17]  N. Vidmar.  THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT: A RECONCEPTUALIZATION OF DISPUTES AND AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION , 1984 .

[18]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  The Role of Perceived Injustice in Defendants' Evaluations of Their Courtroom Experience , 1984 .

[19]  Craig A. McEwen,et al.  Mediation in Small Claims Court: Achieving Compliance through Consent , 1984 .

[20]  Donald E. Conlon,et al.  Decision Control and Process Control Effects on Procedural Fairness Judgments1 , 1983 .

[21]  Jerold S. Auerbach.  Justice without law , 1983 .

[22]  Paul B. Paulus,et al.  Basic group processes , 1983 .

[23]  E. Langer.  The Psychology Of Control , 1983 .

[24]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Procedural Justice, Participation, and the Fair Process Effect in Groups and Organizations , 1983 .

[25]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[26]  M. Feeley,et al.  Neighborhood justice : assessment of an emerging idea , 1982 .

[27]  Richard L. Abel,et al.  The Politics of Informal Justice , 1982 .

[28]  R. Fisher,et al.  Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving in , 1981 .

[29]  L. Nichols,et al.  Beyond the courtroom : programs in community justice and conflict resolution , 1981 .

[30]  L. Fuller,et al.  The Principles of Social Order , 1981 .

[31]  M. Lerner,et al.  The Justice Motive in Social Behavior , 1981 .

[32]  N. Vidmar.  Justice Motives and Other Psychological Factors in the Development and Resolution of Disputes , 1981 .

[33]  Barbara Yngvesson,et al.  Language, Audience, and the Transformation of Disputes , 1980 .

[34]  Richard Lempert.  Grievances and Legitimacy: The Beginnings and End of Dispute Settlement , 1980 .

[35]  R. Hayden,et al.  On the evaluation of procedural systems in laboratory experiments , 1979 .

[36]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[37]  Kenneth I. Winston,et al.  The Forms and Limits of Adjudication , 1978 .

[38]  John Thibaut,et al.  A Theory of Procedure , 1978 .

[39]  John A. Martin,et al.  Small claims courts : a national examination , 1978 .

[40]  H. Kelley,et al.  Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence , 1978 .

[41]  J. Thibaut,et al.  Preference for Modes of Dispute Resolution as a Function of Process and Decision Control. , 1978 .

[42]  W. L. Felstiner,et al.  Mediation as an Alternative to Criminal Prosecution: Ideology and Limitations , 1978 .

[43]  Austin D. Sarat.  Alternatives in Dispute Processing: Litigation in a Small Claims Court , 1976 .

[44]  Donald Black,et al.  The behavior of law , 1976 .

[45]  G. R. Liem,et al.  Performance and satisfaction as affected by personal control over salient decisions. , 1975 .

[46]  Richard J. Harris.  A primer of multivariate statistics , 1975 .

[47]  M. Deutsch.  The Resolution of ConflictConstructive and Destructive Processes , 1974 .

[48]  J. S. Adams,et al.  Inequity In Social Exchange , 1965 .

[49]  H. Helson,et al.  Adaptation-level theory , 1964 .