Abstract
The study employs a questionnaire instrument on the adversary system to compare respondent attitudes from the Tokyo and Minnesota district courts. Empirical verification of the Japanese and American models of conflict resolution and social control developed in the research is accomplished by comparing the responses of the two groups to modal statements about defense counsel roles arrayed in a continuum from administrative (counsel as coach) to due process (protect the client) roles. When urbanization and respondent's role (prosecuting judge, defense attorney) are controlled for, the Japanese reject the extreme implications of the adversary system, particularly in terms of the due process notion, while the American group supports the due process statements. The study corroborates the view that culturally generated value differences may have important impact on conflict resolution and social control, and by implication, international conflict resolution behavior.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
