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

调解和实况调查是无约束力争端解决的例子，因为这些程序不执行具有约束力的解决办法或保证解决冲突。例如，调解人的效力在于他们有能力为争端中的个人提供自愿解决的便利。虽然调解人使用许多不同的工具，但这项研究将具体审查非约束性建议的使用，以此作为改进争端解决的一种方式。现有的研究表明，建议有两种相互矛盾的影响。建议可以通过提供一个锚或“联络点”来促进达成协议，个人可以围绕这个“联络点”自愿解决他们的争端。另一方面，讨价还价研究表明，只有在审判或仲裁结果不确定的情况下，具有约束力的争端解决程序(例如审判或仲裁听证)才能最好地促进规避风险的个人自愿解决。由于调解通常发生在仲裁或审判之前，不具约束力的建议可提供关于具有约束力的和解结果可能是什么的信息。具有讽刺意味的是，这些建议将降低具有约束力的和解结果的不确定性，并从理论上降低自愿和解利率。这项研究的目的是通过系统地将建议引入受控实验室实验来检验这两种影响(焦点或不确定性)中的哪一种起主导作用。有经济动机的受试者将参与讨价还价实验，在这个实验中，计算机生成的建议可能会出现，也可能不会出现，这些建议可能或多或少会对改变计算机化的有约束力的和解结果产生影响。通过操纵建议的存在和影响，不仅可以确定建议是否增加了自愿定居，而且还可以衡量单独的焦点与不确定性的影响。将使用适当的统计分析准确衡量这些影响，数据的设计和分析将有助于实现这项研究的主要目标--深入了解设计和改进现有的争端解决程序。仲裁和调解等替代纠纷解决办法越来越受欢迎，这主要是因为它承诺比诉讼更有效、成本更低地解决纠纷。非约束性争端解决特别受欢迎，因为个人一般更喜欢自主结果，而不是强制结果。据美国社区调解协会报告，在20世纪90年代的S时期，美国社区调解项目的数量增加了200%(从150个增加到450个)。尽管调解比比皆是，但调解的使用是否真的增加了自愿和解，如果是的话，它是通过什么机制发挥作用的，仍有待观察。本研究主要探讨在不同情境下，建议在解决纠纷中的作用。似乎，由于调解的流行和成功，人们已经知道，建议在促进解决方面是有效的。然而，关于自然发生的争端的现有数据不能轻易地将建议的影响与调解人可能使用的其他工具(例如，建立信任)分开。实验室方法可以克服这一限制。该项目承诺帮助改进各种环境下的争端解决，从劳资关系到国际贸易争端，再到社区调解计划。

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.