Procedural Justice in Civil Court Mediation : A Critical Review of the Literature, & Procedural Justice in Civil Court Mediation : Exploring the Instrumental and Non-Instrumental Processes

This article provides a comprehensive review of research on the issue of procedural justice in dispute resolution procedures, with a particular focus on mediation. The review traces the history of the literature from the early control models of Thibaut and Walker ( 1975), through to the modem relational model postulated by Lind and Tyler (1992-1998). It discusses the major theoretical models of procedural justice in terms of their implications for legal dispute resolution and focuses on mediation procedures used by the civil courts. The models provide a theoretical base for identifying which psychological processes, namely non-instrumental, instrumental or relational, operate in influencing litigant satisfaction with civil court mediation. The models also help explain litigants\u27 perceptions of the fairness of mediation and their satisfaction with it as an alternative dispute resolution procedure. Recent research has established that instrumental processes (those processes that revolve around issues relating to outcomes) and non-instrumental processes (those that incorporate the relational concerns and relate to issues of group membership and self-identity) are significant predictors of perceptions of procedural justice. Results from a field study of 103 litigants involved in pre-trial mediation conferences confirmed this, and further suggested that the non-instrumental concerns of voice and status recognition shape litigants\u27 perceptions of procedural justice to a greater extent than the perceptions of mediator neutrality and trust. The design of the study also permitted an examination of group differences. Contrary to expectation, in the group of litigants who had not yet settled, distributive justice proved to be a better predictor of litigant satisfaction than procedural justice. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for procedural justice theory and for the practical enactment of civil court mediation procedures

A Relational Model of Family Lawyering: Exploring the Potential for Education, Practice, and Research

This article responds to what seems to be a hot millennium topic in the family law environment—namely the nature of the relationship between the family lawyer and the client. It proposes a model of family lawyering that puts the relationship with the client explicitly in the foreground of the process and suggests a research regime that could investigate the merits of the model. The authors refer to the model as a relational model of family lawyering. The model involves family lawyers working within a partnering framework that incorporates attention to the relational aspects of the process, and in particular, to mentalizing. Mentalizing is a construct that research has found creates space for parties in the family conflict to consider others\u27 perspectives, alternative courses of action, and more constructive methods of approaching the dispute. The authors propose that the relational model could be a way of conceptualizing what family lawyers already do in practice with a number of additional factors that could enhance best-practice. Adoption of the model could assist family lawyers in attending to some of the psychological needs of the clients in a dispute resolution mode while still fulfilling their requirements as legal advisors. The authors discuss this proposition in the context of implications for education, practice and research

I understand you feel that way, but I feel this way: The benefits of I-language and communicating perspective during conflict

Using hypothetical scenarios, we provided participants with potential opening statements to a conflict discussion that varied on I/you language and communicated perspective. Participants rated the likelihood that the recipient of the statement would react in a defensive manner. Using I-language and communicating perspective were both found to reduce perceptions of hostility. Statements that communicated both self- and other-perspective using I-language (e.g. ‘I understand why you might feel that way, but I feel this way, so I think the situation is unfair’) were rated as the best strategy to open a conflict discussion. Simple acts of initial language use can reduce the chances that conflict discussion will descend into a downward spiral of hostility

A cultural challenge for the Western Australian legal profession: a lack of diversity at the WA Bar?

At the request of the Western Australian Bar Association, the authors undertook a study into issues of diversity at the Western Australian Bar. Members of the Association had noticed, but not specifically studied, various demographic imbalances in the Bar’s constitution. A review of the literature revealed that there was a paucity of statistical analysis of the makeup of Australian barrister associations generally, let alone into any specific reasons as to how and why a demographic imbalance might exist. Recognising that a clearer picture of the breakdown of the demographics of the Western Australian legal profession and of the specific cultures that might exist at the Bar was needed, the authors undertook a study that examined whether there was an existing legal monoculture at the Bar, and if so what some of the reasons for this might be

Negotiation strategy style skills, Second edition

tru

A Relational Model of Family Lawyering: Exploring the Potential for Education, Practice, and Research

This article responds to what seems to be a hot millennium topic in the family law environment—namely the nature of the relationship between the family lawyer and the client. It proposes a model of family lawyering that puts the relationship with the client explicitly in the foreground of the process and suggests a research regime that could investigate the merits of the model. The authors refer to the model as a relational model of family lawyering. The model involves family lawyers working within a partnering framework that incorporates attention to the relational aspects of the process, and in particular, to mentalizing. Mentalizing is a construct that research has found creates space for parties in the family conflict to consider others\u27 perspectives, alternative courses of action, and more constructive methods of approaching the dispute. The authors propose that the relational model could be a way of conceptualizing what family lawyers already do in practice with a number of additional factors that could enhance best-practice. Adoption of the model could assist family lawyers in attending to some of the psychological needs of the clients in a dispute resolution mode while still fulfilling their requirements as legal advisors. The authors discuss this proposition in the context of implications for education, practice and research