This section focuses on the rapidly growing role of AI in dispute resolution practice, education, and legal systems. The entries provide a range of perspectives – from personal reflections and early adoption strategies to advanced prompting guidance and policy-level analysis. While some works explore how AI can support individual users in planning, communication, and writing, others examine broader implications for ethical practice, system design, and professional development. Together, these resources are designed to help mediators, lawyers, educators, students, and institutions integrate AI thoughtfully and responsibly into their work.
These articles offer a gentle on-ramp for those who are curious, cautious, or new to AI. Through personal narrative, practical insights, and commentary on current trends, these pieces aim to normalize initial hesitation and help users build confidence with AI tools. They emphasize human agency, professional judgment, and the ability to learn by doing. This is a starting point for users who want to better understand what AI can do – and what it can’t – before applying it in their practice, teaching, or scholarship.
SSRN (April 10, 2025), 4 pages.
This brief reflection recounts how I came to embrace AI despite my longstanding caution about adopting new technology. Drawing on my experience, it explores how users can grow more comfortable with AI, overcome hesitation, and engage it productively. It emphasizes the value of human control, repeated prompting, and critical judgment. These themes apply to practitioners, academics, students, and others using AI in their work.
SSRN (May 14, 2025), 19 pages.
This article outlines a framework to improve AI literacy among practitioners, parties, program administrators, faculty, students, and scholars in the dispute resolution field. It highlights emerging trends and offers practical suggestions and resources to promote AI literacy and the responsible integration of AI into users’ work.
Indisputably blog (July 15, 2025).
This post recommends a webinar by Jim Melamed exploring the evolving intersection of technology, AI, and mediation. He traces the trajectory of tech adoption in mediation, saying that past innovations were essentially improvements in the “plumbing” of communication. AI is revolutionary because it creates the content that flows through that plumbing. He argues that the human touch will continue to play a vital role in mediation. The post includes links to his PowerPoint slides and full video recording.
These articles provide hands-on guidance for practitioners, educators, and students who want to use AI tools effectively in their work. The materials provide concrete techniques for selecting the right tools, writing better prompts, and managing ethical considerations. They show how AI can promote case preparation, communication, client service, and reflection. They highlight how AI is already being adopted by professionals and suggest ways to integrate these tools thoughtfully and skillfully into daily practice.
SSRN (August 28, 2025), 4 pages.
This article explains why mediators and lawyers increasingly need to use artificial intelligence (AI) tools in their work. It introduces a video offering practical guidance on using AI to enhance planning, help clients make better decisions, and improve efficiency. It includes a basic introduction to AI, practical tips for getting good results and managing risks, and demonstrations of RPS Coach. It provides links to the video, PowerPoint slides, and a transcript of the demonstrations.
SSRN (May 14, 2025), 12 pages.
This article helps users learn how to engage productively with AI tools. It describes the mechanics of writing effective prompts, and includes numerous examples for mediators, lawyers, students, faculty, program administrators, and even disputants.
43 Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation 172 (Nov. 2025), 9 pages.
This article offers a practical guide for using AI tools to improve the judgment and efficiency of lawyers, mediators, and arbitrators. It cites ABA Ethics Opinion 512, which describes lawyers’ ethical duty of technological competence under the ABA Model Rules. It encourages practitioners to begin by selecting AI tools appropriate to their tasks, such as general-purpose platforms or specialized tools listed in the article. It explains how to write effective prompts, use follow-up questions to refine outputs, and apply professional judgment when reviewing results. It includes suggested follow-up prompts and examples of how to use AI throughout the life of a case, from preparation to post-session reflection.
SSRN (June 27, 2024), 8 pages.
This article discusses challenges that mediators face in integrating new technologies into their daily practice. The study draws on data from program participants, who identified technologies they regularly use in their practice including AI.
43 Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation 107 (July / August 2025), 6 pages.
Practitioners are encountering an expanding range of AI tools designed to support negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and other dispute resolution processes. This article describes seven types of AI tools to help resolve disputes, build systems, and train future practitioners. Developers will face both market and ethical pressures to disclose the assumptions, values, and priorities embedded in their tools. As an illustration, this article describes the values built into the RPS Coach tool.
44 Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation 51 (March 2026), 9 pages.
This article identifies three categories of AI-related risk that are especially relevant to legal and dispute resolution practice: breaches of confidentiality, factual inaccuracies, and sycophantic reasoning. It outlines relevant ethical duties for lawyers, mediators, and arbitrators, and provides practical strategies to manage the risks effectively.
Indisputably blog (November 24, 2025).
This post focuses on the persistent sycophancy bias of many AI tools – the habit of praising users’ questions, ideas, or character. It suggests an anti-sycophancy prompt to counteract this bias.
These articles explore broader implications of AI for the future of legal and dispute resolution systems. They highlight the importance of ethical reflection, system design, and long-term thinking in an era of rapid technological change. They adopt a perspective of “responsible realism” – acknowledging both the benefits and the risks of AI, while urging thoughtful engagement rather than hype or avoidance. They invite dispute resolution professionals to approach AI as they would any complex conflict: with openness and a commitment to informed, values-based decision-making.
SSRN (June 18, 2025), 8 pages.
This article synthesizes legal scholars’ views on how generative AI is reshaping legal and dispute resolution practice, education, and scholarship. They share a perspective of responsible realism – acknowledging both the opportunities and risks of AI. It is already reshaping how lawyers, neutrals, educators, students, and scholars work, and its influence will only grow. The scholars identify clear benefits: broader access, greater efficiency, and new support for professional learning. They also warn of serious risks, including bias, de-skilling, and erosion of judgment. Avoiding both hype and panic, they offer realistic strategies, propose policy responses, and analyze developments to promote responsible use and curb misuse.
SSRN (July 31, 2025), 4 pages.
This essay draws on familiar dispute resolution concepts – including attention to situations, interests, and options – to call for a balanced analysis of AI’s risks and benefits. It explores both environmental and educational concerns, considering how AI may affect individuals and society as a whole. It encourages dispute resolution experts to engage in the same reflection and dialogue we promote in our work.
SSRN (April 9, 2026), 4 pages.
This article reflects on widespread public unease about artificial intelligence and identifies a broad range of legitimate concerns, including concentration of power, economic disruption, environmental costs, misinformation, and over-reliance on automated systems. It also highlights significant potential benefits of AI, such as increased access to information, improved learning, and enhanced problem-solving. Rather than framing AI as simply good or bad, the article focuses on a practical question: given the rapid growth and persistence of AI, what can people do about it? It outlines several strategies, including regulation, industry practices, professional norms, and social pressure, but emphasizes education as the most important response. The article argues that developing practical AI literacy and using “centaur” approaches that combine human judgment with AI capabilities can help people both manage risks and take advantage of opportunities.