Intrinsic and Extrinsic Compliance Motivations: Comment on Feldman

The author discusses extrinsic and intrinsic compliance motivations. She focuses on an essay by Yuval Feldman which claims that extrinsic motivation potentially acts in concert with or undermines intrinsic motivation. She also notes that deeper considerations for multiple motivations can add nuance and accuracy to the understanding of litigant behavior

It\u27s Complicated: Reflections on Teaching Negotiation for Women

The role of gender in a negotiation – it’s complicated. This Article highlights the author’s approach to teaching courses focused on gender and negotiation. This approach begins by explaining the structure of negotiation along with basic theories and tactics. After this, the course focuses on the role of gender in negotiation, including gender pay disparities and the efforts to empower women to negotiate. Then, the course moves to data about how well women perform in negotiation and stereotypes of women in negotiations. Ultimately, the class ends with a reminder that those in positions of power must keep an eye to fairness if change of the mentioned inequities is to occur

Social Value Orientation and the Law

Social value orientation is a psychological trait defined as an individual’s natural preference with respect to the allocation of resources. Law and economics scholarship takes as its starting point the rational actor, who is by definition interested solely in maximizing her own personal utility. But social psychology research demonstrates that, in study after study, approximately half of individuals demonstrate a “prosocial” orientation, meaning that they are interested in maximizing the total outcome of the group and are dedicated to an equal split of resources. Only around a quarter of individuals identify as “proself” individualists who prefer to maximize their own outcome per the rational actor model, and members of yet another, smaller group identify as “proself” competitors who want to maximize the relative difference between their own and others’ outcomes. This Article presents social psychologists’ findings regarding the nature of social value orientation and the role that it plays in guiding behavior. It then assesses legal theory and doctrine through the lens of social value orientation in several discrete substantive areas—contract law, corporate law, and family law—as well as in legal procedure and process, showing that “proself” and “prosocial” categories offer a meaningful and helpful way of understanding current doctrine and its effects on behavior. A consideration of social value orientation provides an important, empirical counterbalance to the rationality assumptions of law and economics, helping to show that personal utility maximization neither consistently guides the development of legal doctrine nor dictates human behavior in response to the law. In addition, taking social value orientation seriously suggests insights for the very nature of the relationship between law and human behavior, implicating “nudges,” the potential “crowding out” effect of laws that invoke extrinsic motivation, and the ultimate character of human utility

Procedural Justice and Policing: Four New Directions

This Article, by Professor Rebecca Hollander-Blumoff from Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, analyzes the concept of procedural justice within the frame of contemporary policing. Using the shooting of Michael Brown as a catalyst, Hollander-Blumoff advocates for four potential areas of future development in procedural justice: (1) the interaction between the research on self-control and procedural justice; (2) research on the tools most effective in creating positive perceptions of fairness by police; (3) the implications of treating procedural justice not as a dynamic interchange; and (4) the role of reactive devaluation as it might affect reaction to procedural justice reform

Just Negotiation

This Article argues that the procedural justice—that is, fairness of process—plays a critical and largely unexamined role in legal negotiation, encouraging the acceptance of and adherence to negotiated agreements. An economic focus has dominated prior work on legal negotiation and has largely touted the importance of negotiated outcome rather than process. This Article marshals theoretical support for the role that procedural justice may play in bilateral legal negotiation and supports the theoretical case with empirical data from social psychology. A robust empirical literature has established that procedural justice has a significant effect on individuals’ perceptions of their outcomes in third party decision-making systems, encouraging acceptance of and adherence to outcomes and fostering a perception that decision-making systems are legitimate. Recently, such empirical work has begun to consider the effects of procedural justice in a setting without a third-party decision maker. These newest empirical findings support an increased role for fairness of process in negotiation. The Article concludes by exploring the complexities of taking procedural justice effects in negotiation seriously in light of the fact that legal negotiation is conducted by agent (the attorney), rather than principal (the client)

It’s Complicated: Reflections on Teaching Negotiation for Women

What does it mean to be a woman negotiator? In the two decades that I have been teaching negotiation, I have encountered a wide range of human behavior in the negotiation setting. Individuals run the gamut in terms of their strategies, tactics, worldviews, charisma, perspicacity, flexibility, and other factors that affect negotiation behavior and negotiation outcomes. But one area that negotiation students are always curious about—be they top executives, law students, government employees, lawyers, or doctors—is the role of gender in negotiation. The maddening but intriguing answer to this question is the same as the answer to many other questions about negotiation: it’s complicated. The most important quality of negotiation is its dynamic and fluid nature, each encounter completely unique to its own participants and its own contexts, yet always with the possibility of analysis along a set of identifiable dimensions

Introduction: New Directions in Negotiation and ADR

In Winter 2011, the Washington University Negotiation and Dispute Resolution Program joined forces with Journal to host a scholarship roundtable titled New Directions in Negotiation and ADR. The participants explored exciting, cutting edge issues in negotiation and ADR, and this remarkable volume is the product of that roundtable. The authors in this volume are at the forefront of innovative teaching, practice, and scholarship in negotiation and dispute resolution. Perhaps now more than at any other time in recent history, the practice of law is changing in unexpected ways. New professional roles for lawyers are evolving and legal education is under intense pressure to undertake curricular reforms. Litigation is no longer the default dispute resolution method. ADR—an umbrella term for a range of dispute resolution processes that occur largely outside the courts and includes negotiation, conciliation, mediation, dialogue facilitation, consensus-building, and arbitration—has emerged as a principal mode of legal practice in virtually every legal field and in virtually every country in the world

Procedural Justice and the Rule of Law: Fostering Legitimacy in Alternative Dispute Resolution

In Part II, we provide background on the psychology of procedural justice. Then, because the term rule of law has been used so widely and in so many different ways, we explain its various meanings and go on to draw connections between the elements of procedural justice and the rule of law, highlighting both the similarities and distinctions between the two principles. We then marshal evidence in support of the critical role that procedural justice and rule of law values play in fostering perceptions of legitimacy. Part III explores the links among procedural justice, rule of law, and specific ADR processes, suggesting particular areas of concern where attention should be given to ensure that ADR and rule of law can coexist harmoniousl