Some Determinants of Preference for Modes of Conflict Resolution

Abstract

This experimental study manipulated presence or absence of temporal urgency, presence or absence of a judgmental standard, and the correspondence or noncorrespondence of outcomes among disputants in a factorial design to assess their effects on preferences for five dispute-resolution procedures arranged along a continuum of decreasing third-party intervention: autocratic decision-making, arbitration, a moot, mediation, and bargaining. Arbitration was the most generally preferred means of settlement, followed in order by the moot, mediation, autocratic, and bargaining procedures. The independent variables modified these preferences, however, such that procedures with a high degree of third-party intervention were preferred more when there was temporal urgency, outcome noncorrespondence, and a standard. Interactions revealed that correspondence affected preferences only when there was no temporal urgency, and presence-absence of a standard affected preferences only when there was temporal urgency and outcome correspondence.