Preferences for Dispute Resolution Procedures as a Function of Intentionality,Consequences, Expected Future Interaction,and Power1

Two studies investigated preferences for dispute resolution procedures as a function of several situational factors. Study 1 varied intentionality of the conflict, consequences, and expected future interaction between the disputants. The data indicated that 3rd-party procedures were most preferred when the wrongdoing was intentional and when there were high consequences. Study 2 varied intentionality, consequences and the power relationship between the 2 disputants. The relevant effects of Study 1 were replicated, and it was found that arbitration and advisory arbitration were most preferred when the conflict involved parties of equal power. The study supports the general view that research in several domains can be integrated into a coherent pattern of effects relevant for dispute resolution.