NCJ Number
75494
Journal
Journal of Conflict Resolution Volume: 22 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1978) Pages: 318-341
Date Published
1978
Length
25 pages
Annotation
This report describes a cross-national experimental study examining perceptions of four procedural models for adjudicative conflict resolution, which was conducted in four countries whose legal procedures are based on differing adjudicative models.
Abstract
The countries participating in the study were the United States, Great Britain, France, and West Germany. A total of 178 university students rated the 4 models on a number of dimensions, including their preference for using the model for settling a conflict, fairness of the model, and the amount of control over resolution of the conflict vested in each of several roles. Approximately 50 percent of the subjects at each site were asked to assume the role of the defendant in the adjudicated conflict, and 50 percent were asked to assume the role of the plaintiff. The results showed a general preference for adversary (disputant controlled) models over inquisitorial (adjudicator controlled) models. This preference was not limited to subjects from the United States and Great Britain, whose legal systems are based on adversary models. The primary value of this study resides in its confirmation of the importance of control relationships in determining reactions to adjudicative conflict resolution and in the demonstration that this psychological process seems to transcend national boundaries. Three graphs, six footnotes, four tables, and 24 references are provided. (Author abstract modified)