Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Recent research on the determinants of litigant satisfaction has consistently found that abstract evaluations of the justness of case outcomes and of the fairness of the case disposition process contribute significantly to outcome satisfaction, independent of the favorability of the outcome itself. Most such findings have been produced either in laboratory settings using college student subjects or in survey research involving litigation in which the stakes are relatively small. As a consequence, skepticism has been expressed about whether procedural and distributive justice make a difference in serious civil or criminal cases. Reanalyzing data gathered in a previous panel study of defendants charged with felonies in three cities, we argue that the evidence suggests important effects for procedural and distributive fairness, even among a sample of litigants who share few attributes with college student populations and who are involved in litigation in which the stakes are high. The implications of these findings for case disposition processes such as plea bargaining and alternative dispute resolution techniques are discussed.
Casper et al. (Fri,) studied this question.