Reactions of Participants and Observers to Modes of Adjudication1

Abstract

An important aspect of conflict resolution by judgment of a third party is the extent to which participants and observers are satisfied that both the procedure and the outcome are fair and impartial. Male undergraduates participated in a business simulation, which resulted in a controversy placing them in the position of defendants in a trial. An examination was then made of the effects of adversary and nonadversary procedures, prior belief about guilt, and favorableness of the judgment on participant subjects’perceptions of the adjudication. Another group of subjects who had no prior information about the guilt or innocence of the defendent served as observers. Participant subjects viewed the adversary procedure as most fair and satisfying. They were also most satisfied with judgments resulting from the adversary procedure, independently of pretrial belief or favorableness of verdict. Participants also preferred innocent to guilty verdicts, regardless of their pretrial belief. Subjects who held a pretrial belief of innocence were particularly dissatisfied with guilty verdicts and with the nonadversary trial procedure. Observers also found the adversary procedure to be most fair, and expressed a preference for innocent verdicts.