skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 67149 Find in a Library
Title: THEORY TESTING, THEORY DEVELOPMENT, AND LABORATORY RESEARCH ON LEGAL ISSUES
Journal: LAW AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR  Volume:3  Issue:1-2  Dated:(1979)  Pages:5-19
Author(s): E A LIND; L WALKER
Corporate Author: Plenum Publishing Corp
United States of America
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 15
Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
Plenum Publishing Corp
New York, NY 10013-1576
Grant Number: GS-28590X; GS-40601
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: RESEARCH RESULTS ARE PRESENTED CONCERNING SOME PROPOSED ADVANTAGES OF THE ADVERSARY MODEL OF JUSTICE IN OVERCOMING CERTAIN FORMS OF DECISIONMAKER BIAS, IN UNCOVERING INFORMATION, AND IN ACHIEVING FAIRNESS.
Abstract: TWO LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS USING UNIVERSITY STUDENTS AS SUBJECTS TESTED THE THEORETICAL STATEMENT THAT THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE BY TWO OPPOSING ATTORNEYS SERVES TO OVERCOME CERTAIN FORMS OF DECISIONMAKER BIAS. THE RESULTS OF THE EXPERIMENT, IN WHICH APPROXIMATELY HALF THE SUBJECTS WERE EXPOSED TO A BIASING PROCEDURE BEFORE HEARING THE TEST CASE, WERE CONGRUENT WITH THE HYPOTHESIS. FOR SUBJECTS WHO HAD BEEN EXPOSED TO THE BIASING PROCEDURE, THERE WAS NO SUCH EFFECT OF THE MODE OF PRESENTATION. A SECOND EXPERIMENT, REPLICATING THE ORIGINAL WITH A FRENCH NONADVERSARY MODEL, WAS ALSO CONGRUENT WITH THE HYPOTHESIS AND SUPPORTED THE CLAIM THAT ADVERSARY PRESENTATION COMBATS EXPECTANCY BIAS. HOWEVER, THE SECOND THEORETICAL STATEMENT THAT CLAIMS A DECISIONMAKER IS MORE LIKELY TO RECEIVE ALL RELEVANT DISPUTE INFORMATION FROM ADVERSARY ATTORNEYS RECEIVED ONLY PARTIAL SUPPORT FROM EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS. IN A THIRD STATEMENT SUGGESTING THAT PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE WOULD BE MORE SATISFIED WITH THE ADJUDICATED RESOLUTION WHEN ADVERSARY PROCEDURES ARE USED, EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS LARGELY VERIFIED THIS PROPOSITION. A NEW THEORY OF PROCEDURE SUGGESTS THAT HIGH-CONFLICT SITUATIONS THAT USUALLY REQUIRE ADJUDICATIVE RESOLUTION CAN BE DIVIDED INTO TWO CONCEPTUAL CLASSES: THOSE IN WHICH THE DISPUTE INVOLVES THE DISTRIBUTION OF OUTCOMES AND THOSE IN WHICH THE DISPUTE INVOLVES THE VALIDITY OF GENERAL FACTS OR THEORIES. THE THEORY RECOMMENDS THAT ADVERSARY PROCEDURES BE USED TO RESOLVE OUTCOME, JUSTICE-ORIENTED CONFLICTS AND THAT NONADVERSARY PROCEDURES BE USED TO RESOLVE TRUTH-ORIENTED CONFLICTS. IN ADDITION, PROCEDURES THAT ENCOURAGE PRESENTING INFORMATION RELEVANT TO THE PARTICULAR CASE AND THAT FACILITATE THE APPLICATION OF GENERAL, RATHER THAN SPECIFIC LAWS, ARE BEST IN JUSTICE-ORIENTED DISPUTES. (AOP)
Index Term(s): Alternative dispute settlement; Behavioral science research; Evaluation; Evidence; France; Judicial process; Simulation; Trial procedures
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=67149

*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.