Methodological problems derive from the fact that a perceived injurious experience (PIE) can only be bounded by choosing someone's definition of what is injurious, and such feelings are never universal. The first transformation from unPIE to PIE is called naming, while the next step is termed blaming, when a person attributes the injury to the fault of another individual or social entity. The third transformation, claiming, occurs when someone with a grievance voices it to the person believed responsible and asks for some remedy. The early stages of naming, blaming, and claiming are significant, not only because of the high attrition they reflect, but because the range of behavior they encompass is great and can be used to identify the social structure of disputing. If the unequal distribution of advantages in society has skewed the early stages in which injurious experiences become disputes, then reforms to improve access to the criminal justice system will only benefit those who have already transformed their experience into disputes and may actually accentuate the effects of inequality. PIE's, grievances, and disputes are subjective, unstable, reactive, complicated, and incomplete. One approach to studying transformation is to identify what is being transformed and what does the transforming, with attention to the parties involved, the causes a person attributes for the injurious experience, the scope of the conflict, the choice of mechanisms, the objectives sought, the complainant's ideology, reference groups, representatives and officials such as lawyers, and dispute institutions. Transformation research could improve evaluation research on the effectiveness of different dispute resolution methods and provide more specific data on dispute processing agents, notably in the area of lawyer-client relationships. Suggestions for future research and approximately 675 references are included.