“Making Dispute Resolution Accessible” from the 2026 ODR Forum at Harvard University, presented by Jennifer Shack, Director of Research at Resolution Systems Institute, and Nick White, Research & Evaluations Director at the Maryland Mediation and Conflict Resolution Office.
Our research was strengthened by insights and feedback from members of our advisory board: Katherine Alteneder, Director Emerita of the Self-Represented Litigation Network; Margaret Huang, the ADR Coordinator of the New Hampshire Judicial Branch; Teresa Ross, Executive Director, Illinois Legal Aid; Gent Silberkeit, Senior Litigation Consultant, Blueprint Trial Consulting; Allison Spanner, Director of Access to Justice and Strategic Planning for Illinois Courts; Oladeji Tiamiyu, Law Professor, University of Denver; Nick White, Research & Evaluation Director, Maryland Mediation and Conflict Resolution Office; and Leah Wing, Senior Lecturer II, University of Massachusetts Amherst. We greatly appreciate that they lent their time and expertise to this project.
This project would not be possible without the cooperation of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii and the Supreme Court of Ohio in permitting the use of their materials for our focus groups. We are grateful for their support. We would like to thank in particular Angela Min, chief innovation officer of the Hawaii State Judiciary, and Marya Kolman, Supreme Court of Ohio Dispute Resolution Section manager, for their facilitation of the courts’ approval.
We also wish to thank the focus group participants for their enthusiastic participation in our research. We are grateful as well to RSI Communications and Development Manager Sandy Wiegand for her expert editing.
We are extremely grateful for the American Arbitration Association-International Centre for Dispute Resolution Foundation’s support for our research and the dissemination of the findings.
Jennifer Shack has more than two decades of experience conducting complex evaluations of court-based mediation and online dispute resolution (ODR) programs and researching the effectiveness of ADR. She also designs case management and evaluation systems. Jen has evaluated family ODR and debt and small claims ODR in Michigan and Texas. In cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution, Jennifer led a national committee of the top court ADR researchers in developing the RSI/ABA Model Mediation Surveys. Jennifer has also written a number of articles, including “Access to Justice: Lessons for Designing Text-based Court-Connected ODR Programs.” Additionally, Jennifer served on the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution Research Task Force and is currently co-chair of the Section’s Court Committee. She regularly presents on her research at conferences and on webinars.
Nick White is Research and Evaluation Director for Maryland Judiciary’s Mediation and Conflict Resolution Office (MACRO), works collaboratively with dispute resolution program managers in the courts, external justice partners, and state and local government agencies to help develop assessment tools and procedures to evaluate conflict resolution initiatives. Nick is on the Judiciary’s leadership team for Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and is supporting courts as they develop their remote ADR capacity. Nick has served as Co-Chair of the American Bar Association Dispute Resolution Section’s Court ADR Committee. Trained in mediation in 1996, Nick has mediated and facilitated a broad range of issues, including real estate, multi‐party, U.S. Postal Service, domestic and international public policy and natural resource, parent‐child, community, inter‐governmental, and court‐referred cases. Nick’s doctoral work at the University of Michigan focused on issues of institutionalization of ADR.
Early evaluations found that court text-based online dispute resolution (ODR) programs were under-utilized. To examine why this might be, RSI undertook a series of six focus groups to learn about barriers to ODR use for parties with low literacy, and how courts can more effectively communicate with self-represented litigants about ODR. The focus groups took place in geographically and demographically diverse sites around the US with participants who resembled self-represented litigants.
We asked participants questions about what their response would be to receiving notice that they were being sued, about their communication preferences and their thoughts about ODR in general and text-based ODR in particular. We also had the participants review and provide feedback on a Statement of Claim and Notice of ODR to Defendants (Notice), portions of selfhelp guides, webpages and videos.
Most participants expressed an interest in using ODR to handle a case instead of going to a courthouse, reflecting significant potential for the use of ODR. Participants appreciated the option of settling a case from the comfort of their home without the hassles associated with going to a courthouse. However, after reviewing all the court materials, none of the participants understood that the ODR process was text-based until we explained to them that the process involves negotiating on a structured platform by writing messages back and forth.
Once we explained text-based ODR, we asked about their interest in using this process to resolve their cases. They expressed significant reservations. They were worried about misunderstandings or the other party being uncivil during negotiations. To keep people in check and accountable, many wanted someone to moderate or facilitate their communications with the other party. The majority also preferred mediating via video instead of text, though many preferred text.
Participants questioned the legitimacy of court documents and ODR platforms.
Many participants were concerned about being scammed and wanted reassurance that the mailed court documents, such as the Notice, and the ODR platforms were legitimate. They noted that the court seal and contact information added to the sense of legitimacy.
Participants’ initial reaction to receiving a notice of a lawsuit was feeling overwhelmed and unsure of their ability to respond correctly
When presented with the prospect of being sued, the participants were almost unanimous in saying they would feel overwhelmed or intimidated. These feelings were often associated with the amount of information provided, the formatting of the court documents and a general lack of confidence in their ability to navigate ODR without the help of court staff.
Participants wanted help from court staff or someone knowledgeable
Our participants expressed a strong desire to contact someone who could answer their questions and help them feel more confident navigating ODR. To enhance access to justice and have high participation in their ODR programs, it may be necessary for courts to provide a contact person who is knowledgeable about ODR for parties to get their questions answered.
Word choice appeared to affect whether information was understood
Participants responded best to plain language and wanted legal terms to be defined early in a document. They also noted a preference for step-by-step instructions, which they found easy to follow.
Participants preferred short, targeted formatting
Our focus group data confirmed the benefits of formatting that includes: question and answer or fill-in-the-blank questions, bullet points, and extra white space to separate sections and key information.
Participants wanted pictures and videos
Participants, especially those who struggled to read or knew someone who did, said that simple images on court documents helped them to understand the material. Many also wanted video to supplement the documents they received. They liked simple videos with step-by-step instructions that highlighted what the narrator was saying rather than a sophisticated, sleek video.
For websites, participants want easy-to-find information and large design elements
Participants liked the additional information found in websites, including links to video tutorials. When asked what they would do first on a sample court ODR website, they readily identified the large orange button on the that told them to go to ODR. They had difficulty when given options about what their next step should be.
Participants were concerned about lack of internet access and digital literacy.
In every focus group, participants brought up the difficulty technology raised for them or others. They noted that many people did not have computers or mobile devices, and many did not have broadband access. In addition to the lack of technological devices and internet access, some participants raised the issue of digital literacy. One participant in his 60s said, “I’m just stuck in a different generation, so it’s hard for me to start comprehending. I’m working on it. It’s just taking me a long time.”
Delivery method may impact whether information is received.
We found significant variation in the focus group participants’ preferences for the method of receiving information about their lawsuit as well as differences in the frequency in which they checked mail, email and text. Participants were most likely to prefer to be notified by mail, but a significant portion indicated this was their least preferred way to learn about a lawsuit. They were least likely to prefer email and least likely to check their email daily.
Our findings indicate that for courts to have high ODR participation rates and ensure access to justice for all parties, they need to:
Taking these steps could provide most self-represented litigants with the support they need to create an account and participate in ODR with confidence. In turn, this would reduce the number of people needing to contact court staff with questions about ODR.
It is important to note that some participants’ need for help, their desire for more than one method of communication and their preference for a facilitator all indicate that courts need to consider the resources that may be required to implement text-based ODR. This is especially true for courts that are trying to reduce costs by implementing ODR.access or who do not have digital literacy.
Firstly, my disclaimer is the above image is not mine. I found it a long time ago, and unfortunately I do not remember the source, thus I am unable to...
By Jeff Thompsonstay in dialog, resisting tug to withdraw or to power-play patience wins the war, risk raises its daring head above the foxhole conciliation, as Mother Apology, bravely lifts her veil...
By Daniel DanaLarry Fong discusses the lack of research on the effectiveness of certain styles, but emphasizes that most mediators use a hybrid, eclectic approach that may combine styles.
By Larry Fong
