literature review on online dispute resolution

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Law and Social Science

Volume 16, 2020, review article, online dispute resolution and the future of justice.

• Colin Rule 1
• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: Tyler Technologies, San Jose, California 95124, USA; email: [email protected]
• Vol. 16:277-292 (Volume publication date October 2020) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043049
• First published as a Review in Advance on May 13, 2020
• Copyright © 2020 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved

Technology is changing the way we interact with each other, which in turn is changing the way we resolve our disputes. Every society throughout history has crafted social institutions to resolve problems fairly and consistently, and that is true also for the online society we are building on the Internet. Online dispute resolution (ODR) is the study of how to effectively use technology to help parties resolve their disputes. Originally crafted by companies like eBay to promote trust in eCommerce, ODR is now being integrated into the courts to expand access to justice and reduce costs. With the expansion of artificial intelligence and machine learning, ODR has the potential to become the new default for fast and fair resolutions, but there are many questions that still need to be answered, and much potential for fraud and abuse. In this article, I explain the need for ODR, provide a short history of its evolution, outline a rubric for building ODR systems, share some case studies demonstrating its use, and describe some ethical dilemmas that could accompany its expansion.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

• Amsler T. 2017 . Community dispute resolution: assessing its importance and addressing its challenges. Dispute Resolution Magazine June 29 [Google Scholar]
• Anderson M , Perrin A , Jiang J , Kumar M 2019 . 10% of Americans don't use the internet. Who are they. FactTank April 22. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/22/some-americans-dont-use-the-internet-who-are-they/ [Google Scholar]
• Andreesen M. 2011 . Why software is eating the world. Wall Street Journal Aug. 20. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903480904576512250915629460 [Google Scholar]
• CJC ADR Work. Group 2018 . ADR and civil justice Final Rep., UK CJC ODR Committee Dec. 4, 2018. http://odr.info/cjc/ [Google Scholar]
• Condlin R. 2017 . Online dispute resolution: stinky, repugnant, or drab. Cardozo J. Confl. Resol. 18 : 717– 58 [Google Scholar]
• Dabboussi S. 2018 . Game theory in negotiation. Medium.com Nov 7. https://medium.com/@sabinelea/game-theory-in-negotiation-84dda8f4f707 [Google Scholar]
• Dyer C. 2018 . Self-represented litigants: a guide for government and court decision makers Resour. Guide No. 4, Gov. Law Libr. https://www.aallnet.org/gllsis/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2018/01/scllguide4.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Ebner N. 2012 . ODR and interpersonal trust. Online Dispute Resolution: Theory and Practice: A Treatise on Technology and Dispute Resolution MSA Wahab, E Katsch, D Rainey pp. 215 – 48 The Hague, Neth.: Eleven Int. Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Edwards J. 2014 . Uber is destroying the value of taxi monopolies in a bunch of American cities. Business Insider Nov. 28. https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-destroying-value-of-taxi-monopolies-cartels-2014-11 [Google Scholar]
• FindLaw 2019 . What is mediation. FindLaw.com. https://adr.findlaw.com/mediation/what-is-mediation-.html [Google Scholar]
• Hector M. 2016 . Declining court caseloads reflect societal, other changes. Ill. Bar J. 104 : 3 20 [Google Scholar]
• Himonas D. 2018 . Utah's online dispute resolution program. Dickinson Law Rev 122 : 3 875– 98 [Google Scholar]
• Int. Corp. Assigned Names Numbers (ICANN) 2012a . List of approved dispute resolution service providers. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/providers-6d-2012-02-25-en
• Int. Corp. Assigned Names Numbers (ICANN) 2012b . Rules for uniform domain name dispute resolution policy (the “rules”). https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/udrp-rules-2015-03-11-en
• Int. Counc. Online Dispute Resol. (ICODR) 2019 . ICODR standards. http://www.icodr.org/standards
• Kane S. 2019 . Top advantages of legal process outsourcing (LPO). The Balance Careers Nov. 20. https://www.thebalancecareers.com/top-advantages-of-outsourcing-2164339 [Google Scholar]
• Katsh E , Rifkin J. 2001 . Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace San Francisco: Jossey-Bass [Google Scholar]
• Katsh E , Rule C. 2016 . What we know and need to know about online dispute resolution. S. C. Law Rev. 67 : 329– 44 [Google Scholar]
• Knowlton N. 2016 . Cases without counsel: research on experiences of self-representation in U.S. family court. Res. Rep., Inst. Adv. Am. Legal Syst Denver, CO: https://iaals.du.edu/sites/default/files/documents/publications/cases_without_counsel_research_report.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Kozak L. 2011 . Judicial branch budget cuts. California Courts News July 26. https://www.courts.ca.gov/14876.htm [Google Scholar]
• Kurzweil R. 2005 . The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology New York: Viking Penguin [Google Scholar]
• Lande J. 2015 . Planning is critically important for early dispute resolution. Mediate.com (by way of the Indisputably blog) June 2015. https://www.mediate.com/articles/LandeJbl20150612.cfm [Google Scholar]
• Larson D. 2003 . Online dispute resolution: Do you know where your children are. Negot. J. 19 : 199– 205 [Google Scholar]
• Larson D. 2010 . Artificial intelligence: robots, avatars, and the demise of the human mediator. Ohio State J. Disp. Resol. 25 : 105– 64 [Google Scholar]
• Lucas L. 2017 . Every year, millions try to navigate US courts without a lawyer. The Conversation Sept. 21. http://theconversation.com/every-year-millions-try-to-navigate-us-courts-without-a-lawyer-84159 [Google Scholar]
• Miller J. 2019 . Law schools face diminished enrollment numbers. The Heights Feb. 10. https://bcheights.com/2019/02/10/law-schools-face-diminished-enrollment-numbers/ [Google Scholar]
• Moffitt ML. 2006 . Before the big bang: the making of an ADR pioneer. Negot. J. 22 : 4 437– 43 [Google Scholar]
• Natl. Cent. State Courts 2019a . ODR for courts JTC Resour. Bull., Natl. Cent. State Courts Nov. 29. https://www.ncsc.org/∼/media/Files/PDF/About%20Us/Committees/JTC/JTC%20Resource%20Bulletins/2017-12-18%20ODR%20for%20courts%20v2%20final.ashx [Google Scholar]
• Natl. Cent. State Courts 2019b . Self-representation resource guide. https://www.ncsc.org/Topics/Access-and-Fairness/Self-Representation/Resource-Guide.aspx
• Natl. Cent. Technol. Dispute Resolut. (NCTDR) 2018 . NCSC Pew Charitable Trusts ODR project announcement Proj. Announc., July 10. http://odr.info/ncscpew-charitable-trusts-odr-project-announcement/ [Google Scholar]
• Pew Trusts 2019a . Online dispute resolution offers a new way to access local courts Fact Sheet Jan. 4. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/fact-sheets/2019/01/online-dispute-resolution-offers-a-new-way-to-access-local-courts [Google Scholar]
• Pew Trusts 2019b . Online dispute resolution moves from E-commerce to the courts. Pew Trusts June 4. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2019/06/04/online-dispute-resolution-moves-from-e-commerce-to-the-courts [Google Scholar]
• PR Newswire 2014 . American Arbitration Association selects Modria to power New York No Fault caseload. PR Newswire March 5. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/american-arbitration-association-selects-modria-to-power-new-york-no-fault-caseload-248543191.html [Google Scholar]
• Prossack A. 2018 . The benefits of everyday negotiations. Forbes.com Feb. 13. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashiraprossack1/2018/02/13/the-benefits-of-everyday-negotiations/#3845f9663a9e [Google Scholar]
• Rabinovich-Einy O , Katsh E. 2019 . Blockchain and the inevitability of disputes: the role for online dispute resolution. J. Disp. Res. 2019 : 2 47– 75 [Google Scholar]
• Rigertas LA. 2014 . The legal profession's monopoly: failing to protect consumers. Fordham Law Rev 82 : 2683– 703 [Google Scholar]
• Rule C. 2000 . New mediator capabilities in online dispute resolution. Mediate.com Dec. https://www.mediate.com/articles/rule.cfm [Google Scholar]
• Rule C. 2008 . Making peace on eBay: resolving disputes in the world's largest marketplace. ACResolution Magazine , Fall http://colinrule.com/writing/acr2008.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Rule C , Nagarajan C. 2010 . Leveraging the wisdom of crowds: the eBay Community Court and the future of online dispute resolution. ACResolution Magazine Winter. http://colinrule.com/writing/acr2010.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Rule C , Wilson M. 2015 . Online resolution and citizen empowerment: property tax appeals in North America. Revolutionizing the Interaction between State and Citizens through Digital Communications SB Edwards III, D Santos 185– 205 Hershey, PA: Inf. Resour. Manag. Assoc http://www.colinrule.com/writing/assessments.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Sander FEA , Goldberg SB. 1994 . Fitting the forum to the fuss: a user‐friendly guide to selecting an ADR procedure. Negot. J. 10 : 49– 68 [Google Scholar]
• Schmitz A. 2016 . Building trust in ecommerce through online dispute resolution. Research Handbook on Electronic Commerce Law JA Rothchild 307– 36 Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar [Google Scholar]
• Schmitz AJ , Rule C. 2018 . The New Handshake: Online Dispute Resolution and the Future of Consumer Protection Chicago: Am. Bar Assoc . [Google Scholar]
• Schmitz AJ , Rule C. 2019 . Online dispute resolution for smart contracts. J. Disp. Resol. 2019 : 2 103– 25 [Google Scholar]
• Steiner I. 2015 . Report holds eBay dispute resolution as model for courts. . eCommerceBytes Feb. 16. https://www.ecommercebytes.com/C/blog/blog.pl?/pl/2015/2/1424141431.html [Google Scholar]
• Sternlight JR. 2020 . Pouring a little psychological cold water on online dispute resolution. J. Disp. Resol. 2020 : 1 5 [Google Scholar]
• Tardi C. 2019 . Moore's law. Investopedia.com Sept. 5. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mooreslaw.asp [Google Scholar]
• The Economist 2016 . What is the Nash equilibrium and why does it matter. The Economist Sept. 7. https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2016/09/06/what-is-the-nash-equilibrium-and-why-does-it-matter [Google Scholar]
• Vozza S. 2014 . The 5 most common negotiating mistakes. Fast Company June 23. https://www.fastcompany.com/3033337/the-5-most-common-negotiating-mistakes [Google Scholar]
• Wikipedia.com 2020 . Technological singularity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
• Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, procedural justice and legal compliance, elaborating the individual difference component in deterrence theory, behavioral ethics: toward a deeper understanding of moral judgment and dishonesty, reproductive justice, the rise of international regime complexity, mass imprisonment and inequality in health and family life, procedural justice and policing: a rush to judgment, immigration law beyond borders: externalizing and internalizing border controls in an era of securitization, law and courts in authoritarian regimes, immigration, crime, and victimization: rhetoric and reality.

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Open Access
• About Current Legal Problems
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

• < Previous

The Past, Present, and Future of Online Dispute Resolution

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Orna Rabinovich-Einy, The Past, Present, and Future of Online Dispute Resolution, Current Legal Problems , Volume 74, Issue 1, 2021, Pages 125–148, https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuab004

• Permissions Icon Permissions

This article chronicles the evolution of the field of online dispute resolution from its inception in the mid-1990s to its current application in and outside the court system. While originally ODR played a modest role in the limited domain of e-commerce, over the years its application has expanded significantly, as have its form and function: from processes that have sought to replicate online equivalents to ones that reimagine the design of procedures to better fit party needs and to address the justice system’s longstanding problems. The article predicts that the future of ODR lies in increased automation, which includes artificial intelligence and various forms of structured negotiation, and, consequently, a reduced role for human third parties. This will require a rethinking of the ways in which access to justice, procedural justice and substantive justice can be realized. The key for realizing the values and goals of the justice system lies in the careful design and ongoing evaluation of online systems, activities that have themselves been transformed by technology and the availability of big data.

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Short-term Access

To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.

Don't already have a personal account? Register

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 2044-8422
• Print ISSN 0070-1998
• Copyright © 2024 University College London
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Online Dispute Resolution Services: Justice, Concepts, and Challenges

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 27 August 2020
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Ofir Turel 3 &
• Yufei Yuan 4  

132 Accesses

Online dispute resolution (ODR) services are e-justice service conduits that utilize, implicitly or explicitly, electronic negotiation systems. They are a key mechanism that may provide a viable solution to the flood of e-disputes, and even for face-to-face disputes that can be resolved without being colocated (e.g., see how courts resolve cases during the COVID-19 pandemic). Justice is important in negotiation processes. It is therefore suggested that ODR services are a viable means to serve justice on the web. In this chapter, we describe the state of e-justice and introduce the need for ODR services. We then present the concept of ODR, its different forms, and its association with negotiation support systems. To this end, we portray a classification of ODR services, give examples of different types of services, and specifically discuss one of the promising types, namely, principle-based dispute resolution services. The chapter concludes with an overview of the challenges associated with the introduction of ODR services, and specifically with their adoption by users; an issue that is echoed in several other chapters as well.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Online Dispute Resolution and Models of Relational Law and Justice: A Table of Ethical Principles

Negotiating About Charges and Pleas: Balancing Interests and Justice

http://www.ebay.com/

Bergling S (2000) Alternative dispute resolution for consumer transactions in the borderless online marketplace. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Waldorf, pp 1216

Google Scholar  

Bichler M, Kersten G, Strecker S (2003) Towards a Structured Design of Electronic Negotiations. GGroup Decis Negot 12(4):311–335

Bonnet V, Boudaoud K, Gagnebin M, Harms J, Schultz T (2002) Online dispute resolution systems as web services. In: Proceedings Hewlett-Packard OpenView University Association Workshop held on video conference, workshop on 11–13 June 2002. Available online: http://www.hpovua.org/publications/proceedings

Bunnell D, Luecke R (2000) The eBay phenomenon, 1st edn. Wiley, New York, pp 61–62

Burger WE (1977) Our vicious spiral. Judges J 22(1):49

Chen C (2004) United States and European Union approaches to Internet jurisdiction and their impact on E-commerce. Univ Pa J Int Econ Law 25(1):423–454

DOJ (1992) US Department of Justice Statistics. Report to Congress on the state of litigation. Department of Justice, Washington, DC

Doong HS, Lai HC (2008) Exploring usage continuance of e-negotiation systems: expectation and disconfirmation approach. Group Decis Negot 17(2):111–126

Etzioni A (2019) Cyber trust. J Bus Ethics 156(1):1–13

European Commission (2001) Commission recommendation 2001/310/EC on the principles for out-of-court bodies involved in the consensual resolution of consumer disputes, published in OJ L109/56, 19 Apr 2001

Fisher R (1991) Negotiating power: getting and using influence. In: Breslin JW, Rubin JZ (eds) Negotiation theory and practice. Program on Negotiation Books, Cambridge, MA

Fisher R, Ury W, Patton B (1991) Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in, 2nd edn. Penguin Books, New York

Friedman RA, Currall SC (2003) Conflict escalation: dispute exacerbating elements of e-mail communication. Hum Relat 56(11):1325–1347

Gefen D, Karahanna E, Straub DW (2003) Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Q 27(1):51–90

Gonzalez AG (2003) eBay law: the legal implications of the C2C electronic commerce model. Comput Law Secur Rep 19(6):468–473

Grimmelmann J (2019) Continuity and change in internet law. Commun ACM 62(5):24–26

Hasan AS, Serguievskaia IA (2006) Framework for developing experience based e-negotiation system. J Comput Sci 2(2):180–184

Hornle J (2003) Online dispute resolution: the emperor’s new clothes? Benefits and pitfalls of online dispute resolution and its application to commercial arbitration. Int Rev Law Comput Technol 17(1):27–37

Jones R (1999) Legal pluralism and the adjudication of Internet disputes. Int Rev Law Comput Technol 13(1):49–67

Katsh E (1994) Digital lawyers – orienting the legal profession to cyberspace. Univ Pittsbg Law Rev 55(4):1141–1175

Katsh E, Rifkin J (2001) Online dispute resolution, 1st edn. Jossey-Bass, New York

Katsh E, Rifkin J, Gaitenby A (2000) E-commerce, e-disputes and e-dispute resolution: in the shadow of eBay law. Ohio State J Disput Resolut 15(3):705–734

Kersten GE (2003) The science and engineering of e-negotiation: an introduction. In: 36th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS ’03), Hawaii

Kersten GE (2004) E-negotiation systems: interaction of people and technologies to resolve conflicts. InterNeg international seminar: markets, negotiations and dispute resolution in new economy, John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, Montreal

Kiesler S (1997) Preface. In: Kiesler S (ed) Culture of the Internet. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

Lai HC, Doong HS, Kao CC, Kersten GE (2006) Negotiators’ communication, perception of their counterparts, and performance in dyadic e-negotiations. Group Decis Negot 15(5):429–447

Landry EM (2000) Scrolling around the new organization: the potential for conflict in the on-line environment. Negot J 16(2):133–142

Lee KC, Kang I, Kim JS (2007) Exploring the user interface of negotiation support systems from the user acceptance perspective. Comput Hum Behav 23(1):220–239

Lewicki RJ, Saunders DM, Minton JW (1999) Negotiation (companion volume to: Negotiation: reading, exercises and cases), 3rd edn. Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston

Lewis LF, Spich RS (1996) Principled negotiation, evolutionary systems design, and group support systems: a suggested integration of three approaches to improving negotiations. In: Proceedings of the 29th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, vol 3, pp 238–250

Lim J (2003) A conceptual framework on the adoption of negotiation support systems. Inf Softw Technol 45(8):469–477

Lim J, Gan B, Chang T-T (2002) A survey on NSS adoption intention. In: 35th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. IEEE, Hawaii

Maiese M (2003) Negotiation. http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/negotiation/?nid=1273

Maynes ES (1979) Consumer protection: the issues. J Consum Policy 3:97–109

Mediate.com (2006) The world’s dispute resolution channel. Negotiation power. http://www.mediate.com/divorce/pg26.cfm

Merriam Webster Online (2006) http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/justice . Accessed 15 Dec 2006

Moore DA, Kurtzberg TR, Thompson LL, Morris MW (1999) Long and short routes to success in electronically mediated negotiations: group affiliations and good vibrations. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 77(1):22–43

NCL (2001) Online auctions, 2001 survey. National Consumers League (NCL), Washington, DC

Pacini C, Andrews C, Hillison W (2002) To agree not to agree: Legal issues in online contracting. Bus Horiz 45(1):43–52

Parlade CV (2006) Online dispute resolution and quality of justice. Available at: http://www.odr.info/claro.doc

Pepper R, Jackman M (2019) A data driven approach to closing the Internet inclusion gap. In: Digital economies at global margins. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p 29

Puddister K, Small TA (2020) Trial by zoom? The response to COVID-19 by Canada’s courts. Can J Polit Sci:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423920000505

Ramsay DCI (1981) Consumer redress mechanisms for poor-quality and defective products. Univ Tor Law J 31(2):117–152

Rawls J (1999) A theory of justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Rule C (2002) Online dispute resolution for business, 1st edn. Jossey-Bass (A Wiley Imprint), San Francisco

Schoop M, Jertila A, List T (2003) Negoisst: a negotiation support system for electronic business-to-business negotiations in e-commerce. Data Knowl Eng 47(3):371–401

Schulze Suedhoff U (2001) The protection of the online consumer through online dispute resolution and other models of redress (Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia)

Shah MH, Jones P, Choudrie J (2019) Cybercrimes prevention: promising organisational practices. Inf Technol People 32(5):1125–1129

Swan M (2017) Anticipating the economic benefits of blockchain. Technol Innov Manag Rev 7(10):6–13

Thiessen EM, Soberg A (2003) SmartSettle described with the Montreal taxonomy. Group Decis Negot 12(2):165–170

Thiessen EM, Loucks DP, Stedinger JR (1998) Computer-assisted negotiations of water resources conflicts. Group Decis Negot 7(2):109–129

Turel O (2006) Predictors of disputants’ intentions to use online dispute resolution services: the roles of justice and trust. McMaster University, Hamilton

Turel O (2009) Interdependence issues in analyzing negotiation data. Group Decis Negot

Turel O, Yuan Y (2005) Online negotiation services: benefits and challenges of users and service providers. J Altern Disput Resolut 52:62–77

Turel O, Yuan Y (2006) Trajectories for driving the diffusion of e-negotiation service providers in supply chains: an action research approach. J Internet Commer 5(4):125–149

Turel O, Yuan Y (2007a) Online dispute resolution services for electronic markets: a user centric research agenda. Int J e-Bus 5(6):590–603

Turel O, Yuan Y (2007b) User acceptance of web-based negotiation support systems: the role of perceived intention of the negotiating partner to negotiate online. Group Decis Negot 16(5):451–468

Turel O, Yuan Y (2007c) You can’t shake hands with clenched fists: potential effects of trust assessments on the adoption of e-negotiation services. Group Decis Negot 17(2):141–155

Turel O, Yuan Y, Rose J (2007) Antecedents of attitude towards online mediation. Group Decis Negot 16(6):539–552

Turel O, Yuan YF, Connelly CE (2008) In justice we trust: predicting user acceptance of e-customer services. J Manag Inf Syst 24(4):123–151

Vetschera R, Kersten G, Koeszegi S (2006) User assessment of internet-based negotiation support systems: an exploratory study. J Organ Comput Electron Commer 16(2):123–148

Vice JW (2006) Neutrality, justice, and fairness. Loyola University Chicago. Available at: http://www.ombuds.uci.edu/JOURNALS/1997/neutrality.html

Watson WE, Kumar K, Michaelsen LK (1993) Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction process and performance: comparing homogeneous and diverse task groups. Acad Manag J 36(5):590–602

Xu Z, Yuan Y (2009) Principle-based dispute resolution for consumer protection. Knowl-Based Syst 22:18–27

Yuan Y, Turel O (2007) E-negotiations: bridging the practical divide – introduction to the special issue. Group Decis Negot 17(2):107–109

Zeng J, Mackay D (2019) The influence of managerial attention on the deployment of dynamic capability: a case study of Internet platform firms in China. Ind Corp Chang 28(5):1173–1192

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

California State University, Fullerton, CA, USA

McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ofir Turel .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Wilfrid Laurier University Dept. Mathematics, Waterloo, ON, Canada

D. Marc Kilgour

University of Strathclyde Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Turel, O., Yuan, Y. (2020). Online Dispute Resolution Services: Justice, Concepts, and Challenges. In: Kilgour, D., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_25-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_25-1

Received : 18 June 2020

Accepted : 26 June 2020

Published : 27 August 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-12051-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-12051-1

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Efficiency of Online Dispute Resolution: A Case Study

The emergence of the internet as a commercial phenomenon has resulted in an explosion of interest in Online Dispute Resolution. Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) consists of a variety of settlement methods, which use the electronic environment to resolve conflicts. The aim of the paper is to evaluate the economic performance of a specific process elaborated by one of the main

Related Papers

John Zeleznikow

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has become an established alternative method to litigation in solving disputes in many western jurisdictions. Online dispute resolution (ODR), the application of ICT in ADR has become a new and enhanced technique for dispute resolution. Most current ODR projects have been developed in the area of e-commerce. In this paper we discuss the emerging field of ODR research, point at some challenges for technology and outline strategies we have and are developing for supporting ODR including an integrated environment for supporting ODR and the use of trade-offs and compensation strategies for providing negotiation support. ACIS 2004 Proceedings Paper 79 ; Australasian Conference on Information Systems (15th : 2004 : Hobart, Tas.)

Osinachi Nwandem

With commercial transaction now making wave in the cyberspace, online dispute becomes inevitable. This has led to the evolution of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR). Since its emergence, ODR has shown itself capable of resolving online disputes especially with regards electronic commerce (e-commerce). Just like traditional ADR, ODR makes use of ADR mechanisms such as arbitration, mediation and negotiation. The only difference is that these ADR mechanisms are employed online. One area of ODR that has won the attraction of international organizations and private institutions is online arbitration. Online arbitration has mostly been used to resolve both online and offline disputes. Resolving disputes via online arbitration is similar to traditional arbitration except that disputes are resolved using various technological devices such as video-conference, e-mail, chats and electronic signature (e-signature). The ODR process has been hailed for its simplicity, speed, convenience and been least expensive when compared with traditional ADR and litigation. On the other hand, the process has been criticized as lacking face to face encounter, having security and confidentiality issues, problems with e-arbitration agreements and awards amongst many others. The good news is that most of these challenges are solvable thus, establishing ODR as a viable online equivalent of alternative dispute resolution.

Karolina Mania

The purpose of this study is to present the main facets of online dispute resolution, including a definition of the term, the types of resolution available, and the most recent legal regulations in this area. The article is an in-depth study of this field, discussing online mediation and electronic arbitration, their uses and their relationships with e-commerce. The strengths and weaknesses of online dispute resolution are identified and used to help formulate de lege ferenda stipulations. The paper is divided into three parts. Part I looks at preliminary aspects of online dispute resolution (ODR), including a definition of the term and an examination of its phases of development, implementation examples and the relationship between ODR and technology. Part II is devoted to examining the two most frequent forms of ODR: online mediation and electronic arbitration. Part III is an analysis of consumer disputes arising from commercial transactions made using electronic communications. As an example of the implementation of ODR, the author emphasises the importance of new European regulations on that and alternative dispute resolution (ADR): Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/ 22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR), and Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Regulation on consumer ODR).

Lori Clarke

International Journal of Law and Information Technology

Bruce L Mann

Online Dispute Resolution as a Solution to E-Commerce Disputes: A Comparative Study of Pakistan and UK

The primary aim of this paper is to analyze the online dispute resolution (ODR) as a solution to E-commerce disputes. E-commerce is growing increasingly all over the world. The gradual development of this industry has also brought the issue of E-commerce disputes. The nature of disputes makes it difficult for parties to resolve it through conventional platforms such as courts and alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Therefore, ODR mechanism presents more viable solution for the E-consumers. However, in Pakistan, the regulatory and technological development of ODR is still very insufficient as the E-commerce is an infant industry but with solid growth rate. Therefore, this paper fills this gap and examines the regulatory and technological framework of ODR via comparative study in Pakistan and UK. For this research work, the comparative research approach has been utilized that is based on documentary analysis. It conducts a comparative study of ODR as solution to E-commerce disputes in Pakistan and UK. This paper analytically studies the parliamentary statutes and regulations in Pakistan, UK and international laws and other existing data and studies relating to ODR as solution to E-commerce disputes. At this moment, it's questionable if Pakistan's attempt to dealing with it is genuine and whether the existing inadequate ODR legislation can address the challenges. This research finds that, in order to safeguard online consumers, Pakistan is in a dire need to establish a legal framework for online dispute resolution. The lack of defined legislative criteria for ODR services causes several challenges, especially when public compliance is required. Furthermore, this research finds that the introduction of a mandatory automated negations, online mediation, and e-courts, as first step, might be helpful in this regard as the nature of e-disputes requires quick decision making due to its economic nature in order to avoid further loss. Moreover, this study concludes that the confidence of e-consumer can be increased if they are provided with an effective mechanism for redressal of their grievances

iJOURNALS PUBLICATIONS IJSHRE | IJSRC

The nature of disputes rising at a far greater rate than ever before as people began to travel longer distances and communicate from further away meant that disputes developed as they grew in number and complexity. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) measures were employed. However, the rapid rise in B2C electronic transactions produced a number of concerns for businesses and consumers. the traditional dispute resolution through court proceedings is unsuitable for problems that arise in e-commerce. Therefore, the global arena is witnessing a departure from the traditional process of dispute resolution to online dispute resolution (ODR) in its various forms. This article analyses all the alternative dispute resolution methods, especially e-arbitration used to settle disputes. And what is the Distinguish between e-arbitration and other alternatives.

Nikola Simkova

The rise in number of B2B e-commerce transactions inevitably leads to a corresponding rise in disputes over those transactions. Traditional methods of dispute resolution (litigation, arbitration or mediation) in the offline world, do not address the requirements of online users involved in disputes over online transactions. In response to the demand for dispute resolution procedures which recognize the online user's desire for a fast and flexible mechanism which has a global reach, various research have been performed worldwide. This literature review discusses studies on online dispute resolution. The results indicate four main topics – initiatives, methods, factors, effectiveness and effective system. The complexity of ODR and its implications for future research is discussed.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

International Journal on Online Dispute Resolution

Hiroki Habuka

European Economic Review

Nadège Marchand

MIHAI ADRIAN FELEA

Internet and New Technologies Law

Jacek Gołaczyński

Negotiation Journal

Gerard Vreeswijk

SSRN Electronic Journal

Pablo Cortes

francisco andrade

Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences

Mariam Skhulukhia

Brian Hutchinson

khushbakht qaiser

fahimeh abedi

Paustinus Siburian

Journal ijmr.net.in(UGC Approved)

Ray Friedman

Vilnius University open series

Rachele Beretta

Review of Economics and Development Studies

Dr. Rao Imran Habib

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

The Future of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR): Definitions, Standards, Disability Accessibility, and Legislation

vol. 8 City University of Hong Kong Law Review 73-99, 2020-2022

18 Pages Posted: 17 Apr 2023

David Allen Larson

Mitchell | Hamline School of Law

Date Written: November 4, 2022

Jurisdictions around the world are increasingly turning to Online Dispute Resolution (‘ODR’) to resolve a variety of disputes. ODR adoption has accelerated primarily because of two reasons. First, the COVID-19 pandemic has forced judicial systems to suspend or severely limit inperson proceedings to control infection rates. Private mediators and arbitrators, likewise, have eliminated or dramatically reduced in-person sessions. Second, judicial systems do not have unlimited financial resources. They must always consider ways to provide access to justice as ef!ciently and effectively as possible. ODR may be able to provide signi!cant cost savings. But ODR processes are still new and evolving and much work still needs to be done. The first part of this paper explains why we need a clear definition of ODR. Along with the great potential ODR offers for improving access to justice, it can also compound existing dangers as well as create new ones. The second part explains how a clear definition can help us draft standards that will protect ODR users and suggests what should be included in those standards. Moreover, because an ODR system must be accessible to everyone, the third part explores how ODR accessibility can be guaranteed for persons with disabilities and other vulnerable populations. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines are offered as a critical resource. The final part analyzes user-protective legislation that was enacted in Ontario, Canada and rejected by the United States Congress.

Keywords: disputes, conflict, dispute resolution, ODR, online dispute resolution, technology, mediation, negotiation, arbitration, disability, accessibility, legislation, courts, judiciary, access to justice, A2J, standards, WCAG, Ontario, Canada

JEL Classification: I15, J52, J53, J58, K10, K20, K40, K41, M10, O31, O32, O35, O38

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

David Allen Larson (Contact Author)

Mitchell | hamline school of law ( email ).

875 Summit Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55105 United States 651-290-6388 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://mitchellhamline.edu/biographies/person/david-larson/

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, cyberspace law ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Negotiation & Dispute Resolution eJournal

Disability law ejournal, law & courts ejournal.

Subscribe to this journal for more curated articles on this topic

Conflict, Negotiation, & Organizational Behavior eJournal

Decision making & negotiations ejournal, conflict & dispute resolution ejournal, negotiation processes & communications ejournal, justice & negotiations ejournal, other innovation research & policy ejournal, other political science ejournal, other negotiations & dispute resolution ejournal.

Home > USC Columbia > Law, Joseph F. Rice School of > Law Reviews and Journals > SCLR > Vol. 67 > Iss. 2 (2016)

What We Know and Need to Know about Online Dispute Resolution

Ethan Katsh Colin Rule

Document Type

Recommended citation.

Katsh, Ethan and Rule, Colin (2016) "What We Know and Need to Know about Online Dispute Resolution," South Carolina Law Review : Vol. 67: Iss. 2, Article 10. Available at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/sclr/vol67/iss2/10

Since September 09, 2021

Included in

Law Commons

• Journal Home
• About This Journal
• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Advanced Search

ISSN: 0038-3104

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Consumer satisfaction with the online dispute resolution on a second-hand goods-trading platform, 1. introduction, 2. literature review, 3. research methods, 3.1. lda topic clustering model, 3.2. sentiment analysis, 3.3. tf–idf weights, 4. research process and result analysis, 4.1. data acquisition and preprocessing, 4.2. text-feature extraction, 4.3. feature visualization analysis based on word cloud, 4.4. lda topic clustering, 4.5. sentiment analysis, 4.6. comparative analysis, 5. discussion and conclusions, 5.1. discussion, 5.2. suggestions, 5.3. conclusions, 5.4. limitations and future work, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Ferraro, C.; Sands, S.; Brace-Govan, J. The Role of Fashionability in Second-Hand Shopping Motivations. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016 , 32 , 262–268. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Borusiak, B.; Szymkowiak, A.; Horska, E.; Raszka, N.; Zelichowska, E. Towards Building Sustainable Consumption: A Study of Second-Hand Buying Intentions. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 875. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Evans, F.; Grimmer, L.; Grimmer, M. Consumer Orientations of Secondhand Fashion Shoppers: The Role of Shopping Frequency and Store Type. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022 , 67 , 102991. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Parguel, B.; Lunardo, R.; Benoit-Moreau, F. Sustainability of the Sharing Economy in Question: When Second-Hand Peer-to-Peer Platforms Stimulate Indulgent Consumption. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2017 , 125 , 48–57. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, B.; Fu, Y.; Li, Y. Young Consumers’ Motivations and Barriers to the Purchase of Second-Hand Clothes: An Empirical Study of China. Waste Manag. 2022 , 143 , 157–167. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Arrigo, E. Collaborative Consumption in the Fashion Industry: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework. J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 325 , 129261. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, G.; Geng, Y.; Sun, H.; Tian, X.; Chen, W.; Wu, D. Mapping the Knowledge of Green Consumption: A Meta-Analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020 , 27 , 44937–44950. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dimoka, A.; Hong, Y.; Pavlou, P.A. On Product Uncertainty in Online Markets: Theory and Evidence. MIS Q. 2012 , 36 , 395–426. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cortés, P. Developing Online Dispute Resolution for Consumers in the EU: A Proposal for the Regulation of Accredited Providers. Int. J. Law Info. Tech. 2011 , 19 , 1–28. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Katsh, E. Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace , 1st ed.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2001; ISBN 978-0-7879-5676-9. [ Google Scholar ]
• eBay Inc. General Announcement ; eBay Inc.: San Jose, CA, USA, 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Buying | EBay. Available online: https://www.ebay.co.uk/help/buying (accessed on 11 January 2023).
• Zhou, X. Description and Explanation: Dispute Resolution Mechanism of Taobao China’s Experience and Observation of ODR. J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. Soc. Sci. 2021 , 29 , 97–108. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Han, X. Application and improvement of non -judicial ODR in China: Taking Xianyu court as example. J. Beijing Technol. Bus. Univ. Soc. Sci. 2020 , 35 , 117–126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rule, C.; Nagarajan, C. Crowdsourcing Dispute Resolution over Mobile Devices. Springer Neth. 2011 , 93–106. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sela, A. The effect of online technologies on dispute resolution system design: Antecedents, current trends, and future directions. Lewis Clark Law Rev. 2017 , 21 , 633. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wahab, M. The Global Information Society and Online Dispute Resolution: A New Dawn for Dispute Resolution. J. Int. Arbitr. 2004 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Katsh, E. Bringing Online Dispute Resolution to Virtual Worlds: Creating Processes Through Code. NYLS Law Rev. 2004 , 49 , 12. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rule, C. Online Dispute Resolution For Business: B2B, ECommerce, Consumer, Employment, Insurance, and Other Commercial Conflicts , 1st ed.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2002; ISBN 978-0-7879-5731-5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodman, J. The Pros and Cons of Online Dispute Resolution: An Assessment of Cyber-Mediation Websites. Duke Law Technol. Rev. 2003 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaufmann-Kohler, G.; Schultz, T. Online Dispute Resolution: Challenges for Contemporary Justice ; Kluwer Law International BV: Zürich, Switzerland, 2004; ISBN 978-90-411-2318-3. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xiao, X. Research on the Online Resolution of Online Shopping Disputes in China. J. North Univ. ChinaSocial Sci. Ed. 2022 , 38 , 63–70. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Herik, J.; Dimov, D. Towards Crowdsourced Online Dispute Resolution. J. Int. Commer. Law Technol. 2012 , 7 , 141–162. [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark, E.; Cho, G.; Hoyle, A. Online Dispute Resolution: Present Realities, Pressing Problems and Future Prospects. Int. Rev. Law Comput. Technol. 2003 , 17 , 7–25. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Loebl, Z. Identifying and Establishing Standard ODR Processes. Int. J. Online Disput. Resolut. 2016 , 3 , 125–134. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gonçalves, A.; Vanenkova, I. From Practice to Profession: The ODR Community’s Next Vital Step. Int. J. Online Disput. Resolut. 2016 , 3 , 146–150. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Salter, S. Online dispute resolution and justice system integration: British columbia’s civil resolution tribunal. Windsor Yearb. Access Justice 2017 , 34 , 112. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ong, C.E.; Teh, D. Redress Procedures Expected by Consumers during a Business-to-Consumer e-Commerce Dispute. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2016 , 17 , 150–160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Burtch, G.; Hong, Y.; Kumar, S. When Does Dispute Resolution Substitute for a Reputation System? Empirical Evidence from a Service Procurement Platform. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2021 , 30 , 1565–1582. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kaufmann-Kohler, G. Online Dispute Resolution and Its Significance for International Commercial Arbitration ; International Chamber of Commerce: Paris, France, 2023. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu, H.; Zhang, F.; Wang, W. Implicit Feature Identification in Chinese Reviews Using Explicit Topic Mining Model. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2014 , 76 , 166–175. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Karmaker Santu, S.K.; Sondhi, P.; Zhai, C. Generative Feature Language Models for Mining Implicit Features from Customer Reviews. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Indianapolis, IA, USA, 24 October 2016; pp. 929–938. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang, L.; Liu, B. Aspect and Entity Extraction for Opinion Mining ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; Volume 1, pp. 1–40. ISBN 978-3-642-40836-6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Santosh, D.T.; Vardhan, B.V.; Ramesh, D. Extracting Product Features from Reviews Using Feature Ontology Tree Applied on LDA Topic Clusters. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Advanced Computing (IACC 2016), Bhimavaram, India, 27–28 February 2016; pp. 163–168. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Blei, D.M.; Ng, A.; Jordan, M.I. Latent Dirichlet Allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2003 , 933–1022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kang, D.; Park, Y. Review-Based Measurement of Customer Satisfaction in Mobile Service: Sentiment Analysis and VIKOR Approach. Expert Syst. Appl. 2014 , 41 , 1041–1050. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liang, T.-P.; Li, X.; Yang, C.-T.; Wang, M. What in Consumer Reviews Affects the Sales of Mobile Apps: A Multifacet Sentiment Analysis Approach. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2015 , 20 , 236–260. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, L.-C.; Lee, C.-M.; Chen, M.-Y. Exploration of Social Media for Sentiment Analysis Using Deep Learning. Soft Comput. 2020 , 24 , 8187–8197. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, B. Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pang, B.; Lee, L.; Vaithyanathan, S. Thumbs up? Sentiment Classification Using Machine Learning Techniques ; Association for Computational Linguistics: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yoshida, S.; Kitazono, J.; Ozawa, S.; Sugawara, T.; Haga, T.; Nakamura, S. Sentiment Analysis for Various SNS Media Using Naïve Bayes Classifier and Its Application to Flaming Detection. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Big Data (CIBD, Orlando, FL, USA, 9–12 December 2014; pp. 1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, T.; Xu, R.; He, Y.; Wang, X. Improving Sentiment Analysis via Sentence Type Classification Using BiLSTM-CRF and CNN. Expert Syst. Appl. 2017 , 72 , 221–230. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xiao, K.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, J. Chinese Text Sentiment Analysis Based on Improved Convolutional Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 2016 7th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS), Beijing, China, 26–28 August 2016; pp. 922–926. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turney, P.D. Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down? Semantic Orientation Applied to Unsupervised Classification of Reviews. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 2002 , 417–424. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, Z.; Duan, C.; Cui, Y.; Qin, R. Consumers’ Attitudes toward Low-Carbon Consumption Based on a Computational Model: Evidence from China. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2023 , 186 , 122119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, C.-H.; Yin, J.; Hou, F. A Text Similarity Measurement Combining Word Semantic Information with TF-IDF Method. Chin. J. Comput. 2011 , 34 , 856–864. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shahid, N.; Ilyas, M.U.; Alowibdi, J.S.; Aljohani, N.R. Word Cloud Segmentation for Simplified Exploration of Trending Topics on Twitter. IET Softw. 2017 , 11 , 214–220. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yan, Z.; Xing, M.; Zhang, D.; Ma, B. EXPRS: An Extended Pagerank Method for Product Feature Extraction from Online Consumer Reviews. Inf. Manage. 2015 , 52 , 850–858. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wilson, T.; Wiebe, J.; Hoffmann, P. Recognizing Contextual Polarity: An Exploration of Features for Phrase-Level Sentiment Analysis. Comput. Linguist. 2009 , 35 , 399–433. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lang, C.; Zhang, R. Second-Hand Clothing Acquisition: The Motivations and Barriers to Clothing Swaps for Chinese Consumers. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2019 , 18 , 156–164. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mencarelli, R.; Lunardo, R.; Lombart, C.; Blut, M.; Henon, E. Perceiving Control over the Exchange on Peer-to-Peer Platforms: Measurement and Effects in the Second-Hand Market. Mark. Lett. 2022 , 1–19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pyo, J. The Impact of Jury Experience on Perception of the Criminal Prosecution System. Int. J. Law Crime Justice. 2018 , 52 , 176–184. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Conforti, O. ODR and Restorative Justice Online: Clarifying Concepts Due to Its Legal Implications. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2018 , 6 , 850–857. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Liu, Y.; Wan, Y. Consumer Satisfaction with the Online Dispute Resolution on a Second-Hand Goods-Trading Platform. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3182. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043182

Liu Y, Wan Y. Consumer Satisfaction with the Online Dispute Resolution on a Second-Hand Goods-Trading Platform. Sustainability . 2023; 15(4):3182. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043182

Liu, Yuru, and Yan Wan. 2023. "Consumer Satisfaction with the Online Dispute Resolution on a Second-Hand Goods-Trading Platform" Sustainability 15, no. 4: 3182. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043182

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Online dispute mediation yet to make a big breakthrough

Online dispute resolution in Catalonia is at a very early stage (photo: Unsplash)

When it comes into force, the Spanish Bill on Procedural Efficiency Measures of the Public Justice Service (PLMEP) will make it mandatory – in the civil sphere – to try an adequate dispute resolution mechanism before filing a lawsuit in court. One possible dispute resolution mechanism is mediation, and it is hoped that considering adequate dispute resolution mechanisms a requirement for the processing of lawsuits will have an impact on their use.

Online mediation procedures skyrocketed during Covid , but this growth did not continue after the end of the pandemic despite the advantages of digitalization. The Chair in Conflict Resolution, Mediation and Digital Transformation of the Faculty of Law and Political Science at the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya ( UOC ) and the Mediation Centre of Catalonia of the General-Directorate for Law, Legal Entities and Mediation of the Ministry of Justice of the Government of Catalonia (2022-2024) have carried out a study on the number of online mediation proceedings in Catalonia and the requirements for their success with the aim of analysing the current scenario, identifying the limitations or obstacles to its digitalization and promoting its implementation.

According to the study, whose results have just been presented, online dispute resolution in Catalonia is at a very early stage . "Online mediation is in practice simply one more option for dispute resolution. However, the evolution or growth observed is not proportional to the comparative advantages of mediation for dispute resolution," said Ayllen Gil Seaton , lecturer in Procedural Law and researcher in the UOC's Law, Internet and Digital Transformation ( DITD ) group and author of the study. It also highlights the difficulties involved in counting the number of mediation procedures carried out due to a shortage of statistical information and a lack of uniform criteria for all the data available.

The advantages mentioned by Gil can be summarized in the fact that, to the extent that online mediation results in greater availability of time and space for the subjects of the dispute, it is more cost- and time-efficient and provides more flexibility , especially for the resolution of civil and commercial disputes. Specifically, the study indicates that, in certain cases, going online means "a lower financial cost and shorter times than face-to-face mediation". Another strength to be noted is "the flexibility it gives the parties in terms of conducting the mediation, especially in international settings or cross-border disputes. […] It brings people closer together when they are far away," Gil said.

The report also points to less inhibition in communication, no damages and more contact time between the parties and the mediator. Gil added that "in very delicate emotional situations, it can create less tension." Finally, it is a "less stressful" option for people who are more used to new technologies, such as younger people.

“Going online means a lower financial cost and shorter times than face-to-face mediation”

Disadvantages and proposals for improvement

But it is not all advantages. The study recognizes that one of the most common drawbacks is the loss of the "human factor" . Furthermore, although it is less stressful for young people , the document recognizes that "not everyone is able to use technological and remote methods, whether for reasons of ability, training, means, equal opportunities or accessibility. […] There is still some resistance to the use of new technologies in dispute resolution," said Gil. Finally, she pointed out that one of the critical aspects requiring special attention is data protection and confidentiality.

As a first step in ensuring the success of mediation, whether online or face-to-face, the report highlights the importance of having the right regulations . Specifically, it concludes that "it is necessary to establish rules and institutions that provide the necessary legal support to effectively protect citizens' rights." The report sets out a series of guidelines to carry out online mediation, and some considerations to promote its use.

Finally, the study carried out by the UOC and the Mediation Centre of Catalonia proposes "drawing up a guide available to citizens on the online management and administration of disputes through mediation, providing advice and recommending platforms and technical tools to implement them effectively". The ultimate goal is "to understand that technology is just another tool for dispute management and to know when and how to apply it," said Gil.

The study on the number of online mediation proceedings in Catalonia and the requirements for their success has been carried out by Ayllen Gil Seaton in collaboration with dispute mediator Josep Maria Corominas and with the coordination of Xavier Pastor Pérez , a member of faculty at the UOC and expert in the resolution of public and social disputes and director of the UOC's Chair in Conflict Resolution, Mediation and Digital Transformation.

This UOC project contributes to UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16 : Promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies.

UOC R&I

The UOC's research and innovation (R&I) is helping overcome pressing challenges faced by global societies in the 21st century by studying interactions between technology and human & social sciences with a specific focus on the network society, e-learning and e-health .

Over 500 researchers and more than 50 research groups work in the UOC's seven faculties, its eLearning Research programme and its two research centres: the Internet Interdisciplinary Institute ( IN3 ) and the eHealth Center ( eHC ).

The university also develops online learning innovations at its eLearning Innovation Center ( eLinC ), as well as UOC community entrepreneurship and knowledge transfer via the Hubbik platform.

Open knowledge and the goals of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development serve as strategic pillars for the UOC's teaching, research and innovation. More information: research.uoc.edu .

Experts UOC

• Anna Sánchez-Juárez [email protected] 620 041 736

You may also be interested in…

Most popular, related courses.