WHAT DO DISPUTANTS WANT - PREFERENCES FOR 3RD PARTY RESOLUTION PROCEDURES

Traditional adjudicative procedures for resolving small claims dispute s have been augmented with less formal means of dispute resolution. Tw o such alternatives are arbitration and mediation. Study 1 (N = 74) in vestigated undergraduates' initial perceptions of the consequences tha t are likely to follow from employing adjudication, arbitration and me diation and how these perceptions relate to preference when faced with an abstract dispute. Results revealed that participants preferred med iation over adjudication. Mediation was viewed as having greater inter personal focus, while adjudication was perceived as more fair and solu tion focused. Study 2 (N = 122) examined the impact of three dispute c haracteristics (strength of position, nature of relationship, other pa rty's cooperativeness) on preferences for these same three procedures. Overall, preference was mediated by case strength, with differences i n case strength related to perceived differences in the extent to whic h the various procedures were believed to facilitate a favourable outc ome.