Nonbinding Suggestions and Dispute Rates: Uncertainty, Focal Points, and their Effects on Bargaining Outcomes

非约束性建议和争议率：不确定性、焦点及其对谈判结果的影响

• 批准号: 0316414
• 负责人: David Dickinson
• 金额: $ 4.4万
• 依托单位: Utah State University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2003
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2003-09-01 至 2004-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0316414&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Nonbinding; Suggestions; Dispute; Rates; Uncertainty

Mediation and fact-finding are examples of non-binding dispute resolution since these procedures do not implement binding settlements or guarantee resolution of the conflict. The effectiveness of mediators, for example, lies in their ability to facilitate voluntary settlements for those individuals in dispute. While mediators use many different tools, this research will specifically examine the use of non-binding suggestions as a way of improving dispute resolution. Existing research suggests two conflicting effects of suggestions. Suggestions may facilitate agreement by providing an anchor or "focal point" around which the individuals can voluntarily settle their dispute. On the other hand, bargaining research suggests that binding dispute resolution procedures (e.g., trials or arbitration hearings) will best promote voluntary settlement from risk averse individuals only if trial or arbitration outcomes are uncertain. Since mediation typically occurs prior to arbitration or trials, non-binding suggestions may provide information as to what a binding settlement outcome might be. Ironically, suggestions would then decrease the uncertainty about binding settlement outcomes and, according to theory, reduce voluntary settlement rates. The objective of this research is to examine which of these two effects (focal point or uncertainty) dominates, by systematically introducing suggestions into a controlled laboratory experiment. Financially motivated subjects will engage in a bargaining experiment in which computer generated suggestions may or may not occur, and these suggestions may be more or less influential in altering computerized binding settlement outcomes. By manipulating both the existence and the influence of the suggestion, it is possible to not only determine whether suggestions increase voluntary settlements, but it will also be possible to measure the separate focal point versus uncertainty effects. These effects will be precisely measured using appropriate statistical analysis, and both the design and the analysis of the data will help achieve the main objective of this research-to gain insights into designing and improving existing dispute resolution procedures. Alternative dispute resolution, such as arbitration and mediation, is growing in popularity largely due to its promise of resolving disputes more effectively and at less cost than litigation. Non-binding dispute resolution is especially popular since individuals generally prefer self-determined outcomes to mandated outcomes. The National Association for Community Mediation reported an increase of over 200% in the number of community mediation programs in the U.S. in the 1990's (from 150 to 450). Though mediation abounds, it remains to be seen whether its use actually increases voluntary settlements and, if so, by what mechanisms does it work. This study focuses on the effects of suggestions due to the prevalence of suggestions in resolving disputes in a variety of settings. It may seem that, due to the popularity and success of mediation, suggestions are already known to be effective at facilitating settlements. However, existing data on naturally occurring disputes cannot easily isolate the effects of suggestions from other tools that mediators might use (e.g., trust building). Laboratory methods can overcome this limitation. This project promises to help improve dispute resolution in a variety of settings, from labor-management relations to international trade disputes, to community mediation programs.

调解和事实调查是无约束力争议解决的示例，因为这些程序没有实施约束力的解决方案或保证对冲突的解决方案。 例如，调解员的有效性在于他们有能力为有争议的人促进自愿定居点。 虽然调解员使用许多不同的工具，但这项研究将专门研究非结合建议作为改善争议解决的一种方式。 现有的研究表明，建议的两个相互矛盾的影响。建议可以通过提供锚定或“焦点”来促进同意，个人可以自愿解决他们的争议。 另一方面，讨价还价的研究表明，只有在不确定审判或仲裁结果时，只有在审判或仲裁结果尚不确定时，才能最好地促进具有约束力的争议解决程序（例如，试验或仲裁听证会）。 由于调解通常发生在仲裁或试验之前发生，因此非结合建议可能会提供有关约束定居结果可能是什么的信息。 具有讽刺意味的是，建议将减少有关结合结构结果的不确定性，并根据理论降低自愿定居率。 这项研究的目的是通过系统地将建议引入受控的实验室实验中来检查这两种效应（焦点或不确定性）中的哪些（焦点或不确定性）。 以财务动机的主题将进行谈判实验，在该实验中，计算机生成的建议可能会或可能不会发生，并且这些建议可能或多或少在改变计算机化的结合结构结果方面具有影响力。 通过操纵建议的存在和影响，不仅可以确定建议是否会增加自愿定居点，而且还可以测量单独的焦点与不确定性效应。 这些效果将通过适当的统计分析精确衡量，并且数据的设计和分析都将有助于实现这项研究的主要目标，从而洞悉设计和改善现有的争议解决程序。 替代性争议解决（例如仲裁和调解）在很大程度上越来越受欢迎，这在很大程度上是由于其承诺更有效地解决争议，而其成本比诉讼更少。 非约束性争议解决特别受欢迎，因为个人通常更喜欢自决的结果而不是规定的结果。 全国社区调解协会报告说，在1990年代，美国的社区调解计划数量增加了200％（从150到450）。 尽管调解繁忙，但它的使用是否实际上增加了自愿定居点，如果是，它可以通过哪种机制起作用。 这项研究的重点是由于建议在各种环境中解决争议的盛行而引起的建议的影响。 似乎，由于调解的受欢迎程度和成功，已经知道建议有效地促进定居点。 但是，关于自然发生争议的现有数据无法轻易从调解员可能使用的其他工具（例如，信任建设）中分离出建议的影响。 实验室方法可以克服这一限制。 该项目有望帮助改善各种环境中的争议解决，从劳资关系到国际贸易纠纷，再到社区调解计划。