Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T08:06:50.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Roselle L. Wissler
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

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. Litigants in four small claims courts provided multiple comparison groups that enabled us to 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.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , 1995 , pp. 323 - 358
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 by The Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This research was supported by grants from the American Judicature Society, the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, and the American Psychology-Law Society. I thank MaryAnne Borrelli for helpful comments on earlier drafts.

References

References

Alper, Benedict S., & Nichols, Lawrence T. (1981) Beyond the Courtroom: Programs in Community Justice and Conflict Resolution. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Auerbach, Jerold S. (1983) Justice without Law? New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Black, Donald J. (1976) The Behavior of Law. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Borrelli, MaryAnne (1989) “Small Claims, Smaller Satisfactions? An Analysis of the Small Claims Court from the Litigants' Perspective.” Doctoral diss., Harvard Univ.Google Scholar
Brickman, Philip, Coates, Daniel, & Janoff-Bulman, Ronnie (1978) “Lottery Winners and Accident Victims: Is Happiness Relative?” 36 J. of Personality & Social Psychology 917.Google Scholar
Bush, Robert A. Baruch (1989) “Defining Quality in Dispute Resolution: Taxonomies and Anti-Taxonomies of Quality Arguments,” 66 Denver Univ. Law Rev. 335.Google Scholar
Caro, Francis G. (1984) Small Claims Court Collection in New York City: Assessing the Impact of Reform Measures. New York: Community Service Society.Google Scholar
Conner, Ross F., & Surrette, Ray (1980) “Processing Citizens' Disputes Outside the Courts: A Quasi-experimental Analysis,” 4 Evaluation Rev. 739.Google Scholar
Conley, John M., & O'Barr, William M. (1990) Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cook, Thomas D., & Campbell, Donald T. (1979) Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
DeJong, William (1983) Small Claims Court Reform. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Dejong, William, Goolkasian, Gail A., & McGillis, Daniel (1983) The Use of Mediation and Arbitration in Small Claims Disputes. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Deutsch, Morton (1973) The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Dillon, William R., & Goldstein, Matthew (1984) Multivariate Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Eckhoff, Torstein (1967) “The Mediator, the Judge, and the Administrator in Conflict Resolution,” 10 Acta Sociologica 148.Google Scholar
Elwell, Suzanne E., with Carlson, Christopher D. (1990) “The Iowa Small Claims Court: An Empirical Analysis,” 75 Iowa Law Rev. 433.Google Scholar
Esser, John P. (1989) “Evaluations of Dispute Processing: We Do Not Know What We Think and We Do Not Think What We Know,” 66 Denver Univ. Law Rev. 499.Google Scholar
Felstiner, William L. F., & Williams, Lynne A. (1978) “Mediation as an Alternative to Criminal Prosecution: Ideology and Limitations,” 2 Law & Human Behavior 223.Google Scholar
Fisher, Roger, & Ury, William (1983) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T., & Taylor, Shelley E. (1984) Social Cognition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Folberg, Jay, & Taylor, Alison (1984) Mediation: A Comprehensive Guide to Resolving Conflicts without Litigation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Fuller, Lon L. (1981) “The Forms and Limits of Adjudication,” in Winston, K. I., ed., The Principles of Social Order. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Goerdt, John A. (1992) Small Claims and Traffic Courts: Case Management Procedures, Case Characteristics, and Outcomes in Twelve Urban Jurisdictions. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Stephen B., Green, Eric D., & Sander, Frank E. A. (1985) Dispute Resolution. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Greason, A. L. (1980) “Humanists as Mediators: An Experiment in the Courts of Maine,” 66 ABA J. 576.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Jerald, & Folger, Robert (1983) “Procedural Justice, Participation, and the Fair Process Effect in Groups and Organizations,” in Paulus, P. B., ed., Basic Group Processes. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Harris, Richard J. (1985) A Primer of Multivariate Statistics. 2d ed. Orlando: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hayden, Robert M., & Anderson, Jill K. (1979) “On the Evaluation of Procedural Systems in Laboratory Experiments: A Critique of Thibaut and Walker,” 3 Law & Human Behavior 21.Google Scholar
Helson, Harry (1964) Adaptation-Level Theory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Kai, Mercer, Peter P., & McNeely, Brian (1982) “The Windsor Small Claims Court: An Empirical Study of Plaintiffs and Their Attitudes,” 2 The Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice 87.Google Scholar
Holmes, John G., & Miller, Dale T. (1976) “Interpersonal Conflict,” in Thibaut et al. 1976.Google Scholar
Houlden, Pauline, LaTour, Stephen, Walker, Laurens, & Thibaut, John (1978) “Preference for Modes of Dispute Resolution as a Function of Process and Decision Control” 14 J. of Experimental Social Psychology 13.Google Scholar
Kelley, Harold H., & Thibaut, John W. (1978) Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of Interdependence. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kressel, Kenneth, & Pruitt, Dean G. (1985) “Themes in the Mediation of Social Conflict,” 41 J. of Social Issues 179.Google Scholar
Langer, Ellen (1983) The Psychology of Control. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Leff, Arthur Allen (1970) “Injury, Ignorance, and Spite: The Dynamics of Collective Coercion,” 80 Yale Law J. 1.Google Scholar
Lempert, Richard O. (1980–81) “Grievances and Legitimacy: The Beginnings and End of Dispute Settlement,” 15 Law & Society Rev. 707.Google Scholar
Leventhal, Gerald S. (1976) “Fairness in Social Relationships,” in Thibaut et al. 1976.Google Scholar
Levy, Robert J. (1984) “Comment on the Pearson-Thoennes Study and on Mediation,” 17 Family Law Q. 525.Google Scholar
Liem, G. Ramsay (1975) “Performance and Satisfaction as Affected by Personal Control over Salient Decisions,” 31 J. of Personality & Social Psychology 232.Google Scholar
Allan, Lind E., Lissak, Robin I., & Conlon, Donald E. (1983) “Decision Control and Process Control Effects on Procedural Fairness Judgments,” 13 J. of Applied Social Psychology 338.Google Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, MacCoun, Robert J., Ebener, Patricia A., Felstiner, William L. F., Hensler, Deborah R., Resnik, Judith, & Tyler, Tom R. (1990) “In the Eye of the Beholder: Tort Litigants' Evaluations of Their Experiences in the Civil Justice System,” 24 Law & Society Rev. 953.Google Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, & Tyler, Tom R. (1988) The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luban, David (1989) “The Quality of Justice,” 66 Denver Univ. Law Rev. 381.Google Scholar
MacCoun, Robert J., Lind, E. Allan, & Tyler, Tom R. (1992) “Potential Consequences of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Courts,” in Kagehiro, D. K. & Laufer, W. S., eds., Handbook of Psychology and Law. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
McEwen, Craig A., & Maiman, Richard J. (1981) “Small Claims Mediation in Maine: An Empirical Assessment,” 33 Maine Law Rev. 237.Google Scholar
McEwen, Craig A., & Maiman, Richard J. (1984) “Mediation in Small Claims Court: Achieving Compliance Through Consent,” 18 Law & Society Rev. 11.Google Scholar
McEwen, Craig A., & Maiman, Richard J. (1986) “The Relative Significance of Disputing Forum and Dispute Characteristics for Outcome and Compliance,” 20 Law & Society Rev. 439.Google Scholar
McEwen, Craig A., & Maiman, Richard J. (1988) “Coercion and Consent: A Tale of Two Court Reforms,” 10 Law & Policy 3.Google Scholar
McGillis, Daniel (1980) “The Quiet (R)evolution in American Dispute Settlement,” 31 (2) Harvard Law School Bull. 20 (Spring).Google Scholar
Mather, Lynn, & Yngvesson, Barbara (1980–81) “Language, Audience, and the Transformation of Disputes,” 15 Law & Society Rev. 775.Google Scholar
Menkel-Meadow, Carrie J. (1985) “For and against Settlement: Uses and Abuses of the Mandatory Settlement Conference,” 33 UCLA Law Rev. 485.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle, & Silbey, Susan S. (1984) “What Do Plaintiffs Want? Reexamining the Concept of Dispute,” 9 Justice System J. 151.Google Scholar
O'Barr, William M., & Conley, John M. (1985) “Litigant Satisfaction versus Legal Adequacy in Small Claims Court Narratives,” 19 Law & Society Rev. 661.Google Scholar
O'Barr, William M., & Conley, John M. (1988) “Lay Expectations of the Civil Justice System,” 22 Law & Society Rev. 137.Google Scholar
Pearson, Jessica (1982) “An Evaluation of Alternatives to Court Adjudication,” 7 Justice System J. 420.Google Scholar
Roehl, Janice A., & Cook, Royer F. (1985) “Issues in Mediation: Rhetoric and Reality Revisited,” 41 J. of Social Issues 161.Google Scholar
Rogers, Nancy H., & McEwen, Craig A. (1989) Mediation: Law, Policy, Practice. Rochester, NY: Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Ruhnka, John C., & Weller, Steven (1978) Small Claims Courts: A National Examination. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Sander, Frank E. A. (1976) “Varieties of Dispute Processing,” 70 Federal Rules Decisions 111.Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin (1976) “Alternatives in Dispute Processing: Litigation in a Small Claims Court,” 10 Law & Society Rev. 339.Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin (1988) “The ‘New Formalism’ in Disputing and Dispute Processing,” 21 Law & Society Rev. 695.Google Scholar
Sheppard, Blair H. (1984) “Third Party Conflict Intervention: A Procedural Framework,” in Staw, B. & Cummings, L. L., eds., 6 Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Silbey, Susan S., & Merry, Sally E. (1982) “The Problems Shape the Process: Managing Disputes in Mediation and Court.” Unpublished, Wellesley College.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, Barbara G., & Fidell, Linda S. (1983) Using Multivariate Statistics. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Thibaut, John, & Walker, Laurens (1975) Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. New York: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Thibaut, John, & Walker, Laurens (1978) “A Theory of Procedure,” 66 California Law Rev. 541.Google Scholar
Thibaut, John W., Spence, Janet T., & Carson, Robert C., eds. (1976) Contemporary Topics in Social Psychology. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Tomasic, Roman (1982) “Mediation as an Alternative to Adjudication: Rhetoric and Reality in the Neighborhood Justice Movement,” in Tomasic, R. & Feely, M., eds., Neighborhood Justice: Assessment of an Emerging Idea. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. (1984) “The Role of Perceived Injustice in Defendants' Evaluations of Their Courtroom Experience,” 18 Law & Society Rev. 51.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. (1988) “What Is Procedural Justice? Criteria Used by Citizens to Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures,” 22 Law & Society Rev. 103.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. (1989) “The Quality of Dispute Resolution Procedures and Outcomes: Measurement Problems and Possibilities,” 66 Denver Univ. Law Rev. 419.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R., Rasinski, Kenneth A., & Spodick, Nancy (1985) “Influence of Voice on Satisfaction with Leaders: Exploring the Meaning of Process Control,” 48 J. of Personality & Social Psychology 72.Google Scholar
Vidmar, Neil (1981) “Justice Motives and Other Psychological Factors in the Development and Resolution of Disputes,” in Lerner, M. J. & Lerner, S. C., eds., The Justice Motive in Social Behavior. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Vidmar, Neil (1984) “The Small Claims Court: A Reconceptualization of Disputes and an Empirical Investigation,” 18 Law & Society Rev. 515.Google Scholar
Vidmar, Neil (1985) “An Assessment of Mediation in a Small Claims Court,” 41 J. of Social Issues 127.Google Scholar
Vidmar, Neil (1987) “Assessing the Effects of Case Characteristics and Settlement Forum on Dispute Outcomes and Compliance,” 21 Law & Society Rev. 155.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Leland (1990) SYSTAT: The System for Statistics. Evanston, IL: SYSTAT, Inc.Google Scholar
Yngvesson, Barbara, & Hennessey, Patricia (1975) “Small Claims, Complex Disputes: A Review of the Small Claims Literature,” 9 Law & Society Rev. 219.Google Scholar

Statutes and Court Documents

General Laws of Massachusetts (1986), ch. 218, §§ 21–25.Google Scholar
District Court Department, Trial Court of Massachusetts, Small Claims Session (1984) “Statement of Small Claim and Notice of Trial,” DC-SC-1 (3–84).Google Scholar