• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
Technology is changing the way that children are communicating (particularly elementary and pre-school aged children), and these changes have significant implications for alternative dispute resolution processes and practices. Although ADR practitioners and theorists are not ignoring technology, we have focused almost exclusively on the question of how we can use technology to enhance our existing practices. We are not paying sufficient attention to the fact that young children are communicating differently than we communicate. Insufficient energy is being dedicated to the question of how those differences in communication inevitably influence the way that those children resolve disputes.

The article analyzes social science research that describes and documents how technology is changing the ways in which children are communicating. The successes of software and hardware developers are coming so quickly that it is difficult for those of us outside the technology fields to stay informed. Dispute resolvers are not asking how new technologies, technologies of which we may not even be aware (or at least not fully understand), are changing the way that our children are communicating. We also are not asking how those changes affect alternative dispute resolution.

The article suggests ways in which ADR will change as a result of the ways children are communicating. It also discusses the future of current theories and approaches to ADR, such as "mindfulness meditation" (frequently discussed by Professor Leonard Riskin, among others).

dispute resolution, ODR,online dispute resolution, technology, children, avatars, communicate, intimacy, internet, cellular, television, computer mediated communication, SMS, mediation, negotiation

Abstract:
Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR) presents opportunities and dangers that we cannot yet fully envision. Technologies are available or imminent, such as tele-immersion, that will dramatically change the ways we think about dispute resolution in a virtual environment. Whether or not one finds the idea of TMDR appealing, a generation of teens and preteens is integrating technology so deeply into their daily lives that they not only will expect, but will demand, that those technologies be used in a dispute resolution proceeding. Because girls communicate differently than boys when using technology, it will be interesting to learn if women prove to be more effective technology mediated dispute resolvers than men.

TMDR already is proving to be the most appropriate process when great distances are involved or safety and security are paramount. Despite the fears some may have, virtual spaces do not produce only virtual agreements. TMDR can enable us to achieve long-term process goals, and technology usage does not cause us to be less satisfied or content. Although the dangers of technology can be formidable, a number of protective measures are possible. We must be vigilant to ensure that neutrals are not using technology to manipulate dispute resolution processes. And finally, parties and neutrals must take care to protect confidential information from wrongdoers intent on taking advantage of technology's inherent vulnerabilities.

ADR, alternative dispute resolution, ODR, online dispute resolution, technology, negotiation, arbitration, mediation, children, communication, teens, virtual, cyberspace, phone, danger, labor, psychology, internet, privacy, radio, settlement, computer, manipulate, virtual, neutral, threat, sex, age

Abstract:
Will we ever see the day when the Internet serves as the primary venue for problem solving and dispute resolution? Social science research suggests that our online communication skills will improve as we learn relational behaviors based upon nonverbal cues available online. Dispute resolution and problem solving will move online, however, whether or not you and I master those skills. Our children already have developed effective online relational behaviors and can establish trust and intimacy online.

Online Dispute Resolution, ODR, Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution, TMDR, Computer Mediated Communication, CMC, Information and Communication Technology, ICT,mediation,negotiation,internet,intimacy,kids,ADR,alternative dispute resolution,children,friends,relational,teenage,IM,instant messaging

Abstract:
The ethical standards governing conflicts of interest disclosure requirements for arbitrators and mediators are numerous and varied. In spite of the considerable attention that conflict of interest questions attract, both the extent to which an arbitrator must disclose past, present, and potential conflicts of interest and the consequences of a failure to make an appropriate disclosure remain unclear. This article examines disclosure requirements themselves, as well as the sanctions and penalties that may result from a failure to disclose information concerning a neutral's impartiality. Particular attention is paid to what generally is regarded as the most extreme consequence of failure; that being, vacatur.

Much of the confusion regarding disclosure requirements results from the fact that it is not always clear which conflict of interest and disclosure standard is controlling. Relevant standards include arbitral associations' codes of conduct, local codes of ethics, statutes, rules of professional conduct, and judicial decisions. The existing myriad of relevant guidance, regulations, and judicial decisions concerning conflicts of interest and required disclosures can lead arbitrators to make choices that conceivably result not only in sanctions but the nuclear option of the arbitral world, vacatur. Arbitral institutions, such as the American Arbitration Association and the National Arbitration Forum, have not been sufficiently careful to ensure that their codes, standards, and bills of rights do not articulate inconsistent standards as to what conflicts of interest must be disclosed and the consequences of both disclosure (possible removal) and failure to disclose (sanctions and vacatur).

A cynic might assert that in an apparent effort to assure potential clients that their arbitration services are as credible, ethical, and trustworthy as any other dispute resolution process, arbitral institutions have aggressively incorporated every available, recognized external ethics code or codes of conduct (such as judicial codes and local ethics codes) into the arbitral association's own code. A more forgiving commentator might reply that the associations are incorporating external codes because those codes generally have been in existence for a significant period of time, have undergone intense scrutiny, and can help achieve the arbitral association's goal of providing reliable and ethical services. Adopting and incorporating external codes that may have been drafted to regulate services other than arbitration, however, can create obligations inconsistent with the arbitral association's own codes and incompatible with the goals and realities of arbitration.

A call for the courts to adopt a more uniform standard for determining when a failure to disclose a conflict of interest will result in evident partiality warranting vacatur may not be answered any time soon. But there is no reason why arbitral institutions cannot review and, if necessary, amend their own codes and recommendations to ensure that their expectations concerning conflict of interest and disclosures are defined as clearly as possible.

ethics, ethical,ADR,dispute resolution,arbitration,arbitrator,disclosure,conflict of interest,alternative,code of conduct,vacatur,FAA,Federal Arbitration Act,misconduct,sanction,international,professional responsibility,standard,neutral,partiality,bias,RUAA,judicial,settlement,IBA,AAA,NAF,JAMS,award

Abstract:
As technology has advanced, many have wondered whether (or simply when) artificial intelligent devices will replace the humans who perform complex, interactive, interpersonal tasks such as dispute resolution. Has science now progressed to the point that artificial intelligence devices can replace human mediators, arbitrators, dispute resolvers and problem solvers? Can humanoid robots, attractive avatars and other relational agents create the requisite level of trust and elicit the truthful, perhaps intimate or painful, disclosures often necessary to resolve a dispute or solve a problem? This article will explore these questions. Regardless of whether the reader is convinced that the demise of the human mediator or arbitrator is imminent, one cannot deny that artificial intelligence now has the capability to assume many of the responsibilities currently being performed by alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practitioners. It is fascinating (and perhaps unsettling) to realize the complexity and seriousness of tasks currently delegated to avatars and robots. This article will review some of those delegations and suggest how the artificial intelligence developed to complete those assignments may be relevant to dispute resolution and problem solving. “Relational Agents,” which can have a physical presence such as a robot, be embodied in an avatar, or have no detectable form whatsoever and exist only as software, are able to create long term socio-economic relationships with users built on trust, rapport and therapeutic goals. Relational agents are interacting with humans in circumstances that have significant consequences in the physical world. These interactions provide insights as to how robots and avatars can participate productively in dispute resolution processes. Can human mediators and arbitrators be replaced by robots and avatars that not only physically resemble humans, but also act, think, and reason like humans? And to raise a particularly interesting question, can robots, avatars and other relational agents look, move, act, think, and reason even “better” than humans?

ADR,ODR,Alternative Dispute Resolution,Online Dispute Resolution,Mediation,Negotiation,Arbitration,Problem Solving,Artificial Intelligence,AI,Avatar,Robot,Social Network,virtual,relational agent,computer,internet,technology,human,health care,collaboration,emotion,cognition,neuroscience,brain,mediate

Abstract:
This article presents a sampling of the ways in which $236.5 billion could have been spent if that money was not dedicated to the war in Iraq. The identification of specific alternatives may provoke further discussion as to how the United States has been spending, and how it should spend, its tax dollars. Thus the first goal of the article is to initiate an informed discussion about domestic policy and spending.

Additionally, recognition of what the United States could have accomplished with $236.5 billion dollars may prompt non-governmental organizations, political parties, independent media, courts and citizens to question the United States government's reasons for the invasion of Iraq. If those groups find the justifications wanting, then their reactions to the cost of the war may give them sufficient motivation to act and hold their government accountable to international law. In other words, if one accepts an integrated theory of international law (which is explained in the article), and if one concludes that the invasion of Iraq was a violation of international law, then the collateral consequences for the United States government may force the United States to reconsider its unwillingness to obey international law.

The article is topical and it addresses issues that should concern all Americans. The second goal of the article, which is to inspire the types of collateral consequences that may strengthen international law, relies upon an integrated theory of international law.

Iraq,cost,war,international law,united nations,health,retirement,education,budget,foreign policy,WMD,hunger,poverty,domestic policy

Abstract:
The work of American Sign Language (ASL)/English interpreters is filled with complex interpersonal, linguistic and cultural challenges. The decisions and ethical dilemmas interpreters face on a daily basis are countless and the potential for disagreement regarding those decisions is great. Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution (TMDR) processes can be particularly helpful when misunderstandings and conflicts arise. Technology Mediated Dispute Resolution is a more inclusive phrase than Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and includes cellular telephones, radio frequency devices, and satellite communication systems. The Deaf Community has learned to adapt and rely upon a variety of technologies and, because many Deaf individuals already are comfortable with technology, it makes sense to further integrate technology into dispute resolution processes. And while the Deaf Community can benefit from a greater reliance on technology, conversely, the communication skills that the Deaf community and interpreters employ routinely can provide valuable insights for everyone who uses new technologies to communicate and resolve disputes.

David Allen Larson previously has addressed the opportunities and dangers inherent in technology. He believes that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) practitioners and theorists must study how individuals increasingly are using technology to communicate. Those practitioners and theorists then must determine how those technologies can be integrated into dispute resolution processes most productively. He offers three distinct reasons why we need to approach technology in this manner: 1) teens and preteens, who soon will be adults, rely heavily on technology to communicate and we need to become competent in those technologies; 2) fuel prices continue to rise and technology allows us to communicate effectively without incurring travel expenses; and 3) security concerns have made physical travel less convenient and potentially less safe.

This article examines the mediation process within the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf Ethical Practices System and suggests when and how technology may be utilized to enhance that process. Background information regarding the interpreting profession, the Deaf Community and the process for filing and reviewing grievances provides a context for this discussion. An overview of the technologies already being used within the Deaf Community and interpreting field assists in determining where new technologies can be introduced most effectively. Each of the three steps in the EPS is analyzed to assess how additional technologies can be integrated productively. Finally, peripheral activities surrounding the EPS and mediation process are identified, highlighting elements in which technology may be used.

ADR, alternative dispute resolution, ODR, online dispute resolution, Technology, Mediation, Arbitration,Negotiation, conflict, CMC, IM, text, Deaf, disability, accommodation, video, interpreter, ASL, sign language, ethics, v-log, website, Second Life, Millenials, discrimination, communication