About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

66 Calif. L. Rev. 541 (1978)
A Theory of Procedure

handle is hein.journals/calr66 and id is 555 raw text is: A Theory of Procedure I John Thibautt Laurens Walkert The search for the most effective conflict resolution procedure requires identffcation of the primary objective in resolving dfferent kinds of dis- putes. This 4rticle focuses on the kind of disputes considered in the legal system and draws on the results of the authors' empirical studies to de- velop a general theory ofprocedure for attaining the objectives of truth and ftstice in situations of cognitive conflict, conflict of interest, and in mixed disputes. In this Article, we propose a general theory of procedure for resolving conflicts, with special attention to disputes dealt with in the legal process. For a number of years we have applied the theories and methods of social psychology in our research to examine and compare the characteristics of various procedural systems incorporated in the legal process.1 Until now we have published only the reports of particu- lar projects, with occasional speculation about more general issues. But now we have developed the body of our research sufficiently to make a more comprehensive statement. In this Article we propose a general framework for analyzing and classifying all conflict resolution proce- dures, including, of course, all procedures employed in the legal proc- ess. The initial step in stating a theory of procedure is to recognize the fundamental dichotomy between the potential dispute resolution objec- tives of truth and justice. This dichotomy, we suggest, is the neces- sary result of differences in the type of conflict involved in the dispute. In conflicts about the most accurate view of reality, such as scientific disputes, the objective is to determine the truth according to a standard. We suggest that an autocratic procedure is most likely to attain this objective. Conflicts about the apportionment of outcomes, such as in- t Alumni Distinguished Professor of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill * Professor of Law, University of Virginia. The research for this Article was supported in part by National Science Foundation grants GS 40601 and SOC 76-15767. 1. Much of this research is summarized in J. THIBAUT & L. WALKER, PROCEDURAL JUS- TICE (1975). Later work is reported in LaTour, Houlden, Walker, & Thibaut, Procedure: Transna- tional Perspectives and Preferences, 86 YALE L.J. 258 (1976) and in Houlden, LaTour, Walker, & Thibaut, Preferencefor Modes ofDispute Resolution as a Function of Process and Decision Control, 14 J. EXPERIMENTAL Soc. PSYCH. 13 (1978) [hereinafter cited as Process and Decision Control].

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most