skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 150011 Find in a Library
Title: Procedural Preferences, Perceptions of Fairness, and Compliance With Outcomes: A Study of Alternatives to the Standard Adversary Trial Procedure
Journal: Law and Human Behavior  Volume:18  Issue:4  Dated:(August 1994)  Pages:361- 376
Author(s): N G Poythress
Date Published: 1994
Page Count: 16
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study examined procedural preferences, perceptions of fairness, and compliance with outcome for a sample of 198 mental health professionals who read a vignette that described a malpractice case and were asked to imagine themselves in the defendant's role.
Abstract: Using a between-subjects design, each subject was offered two possible trial procedures for resolving the case: the standard adversarial procedure and one of five possible hybrid procedures. Using scales that juxtaposed these two procedures, subjects provided judgments on 12 procedural justice dimensions. A series of regression analyses examined the most important determinants of PREFERENCE judgments. FAIRNESS ratings, and ratings of imagined COMPLIANCE with trial outcomes. PREFERENCE ratings were significantly influenced by perceived FAIRNESS of the procedures and by OUTCOME CONTROL. Perceived accuracy of the available trial procedures contributed most of the unique variance explained for dependent measures of FAIRNESS and COMPLIANCE. The authors advise that models that represent variations on the standard adversarial model or hybrids that share some features of both the adversarial and inquisitorial models have fared well compared with the standard adversarial model in terms of desirable procedural justice attributes. Although some of the relationships established in earlier studies appear robust, these studies suggest that the attribute of perceived accuracy of procedures, which was not investigated in previous work, may significantly influence procedural justice judgments. Thus, respondents' perceptions and concerns about accuracy should be considered by investigators in future research in this area. 4 tables and 16 references
Main Term(s): Alternative court procedures
Index Term(s): Alternative dispute settlement; Civil proceedings; Malpractice litigation
Note: Division 41 Presidential Address presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association in Toronto, August 1993.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.