Lind, E. A., MacCoun, R. J., Ebener, P. A., Felstiner, W. L. F., Hensler, D. R., Resnick, J., & Tyler, T. R. (1990). In the eye of the beholder: Tort litigants' evaluations of their experiences in the civil justice system. Law and Society Review, 24, 953-996.

Interviewed litigants in personal injury cases whose cases had been resolved by trial, court-annexed arbitration, judicial settlement conferences, or bilateral settlement. The Ss viewed trial and arbitration procedures as more fair than bilateral settlement because the former gave their cases more respectful treatment. Ss were less satisfied with the outcome of judicial settlement conferences than with the outcome of bilateral settlements because judicial settlement conference outcomes were more likely to fall below their expectations. In general, procedural justice judgments and outcome satisfaction were little related to objective outcome, cost, or delay; instead, evaluations appeared to be determined largely by perceptions of whether the procedure met litigants' criteria for procedural fairness and expectations on outcomes and costs.