Procedural preference as a function of conflict intensity.

Conducted 2 studies with college students to examine procedural preferences in conflict situations that, unlike the conflicts in most procedural justice work, permit concession exchange. In this conflict setting, disputants have been found to prefer procedures that provide them with a share of decision control as well as complete process control. Among competitively motivated disputants, bargaining strength is shown to qualify these preferences, in that weak-case disputants want the least 3rd-party involvement. Exp I, with 126 Ss, demonstrated the robustness of disputants' preferences for process control, because an autocratic procedure receives unfavorable ratings independently of the opportunity for concession exchange. Exp II showed that disputants confronted with integrative settlement options prefer bargaining over mediation and arbitration. It is concluded that findings support the claim that conflict structure must be considered in any attempt to predict disputants' procedural preferences. (37 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)