Theoretical and practical aspects of the theory of procedural justice in social psychology and legal conflictology (based on the study of the conflict and the legal forms of its resolution)

Multidimensional content of the category of justice as a universal measure of behavior and worldview predetermines the appearance of new and even non-traditional interpretations of this concept in modern science. Problems of social justice, legal justice, distributive justice, formal, interpersonal and political justice have been repeatedly discussed by science at various levels, which is undoubtedly due to the role and regulatory function of justice in organizing social interaction.

The increasing conflictuality of society causes the practical need for such forms and methods of dispute resolution and conflict resolution, which would allow to use the positive function of conflict to ensure the coordinated and productive development of society and the satisfaction of the interests of its participants. The positive function of the conflict will be realized in the case of a general positive assessment of the fairness of interaction in its resolution, i.e. the assessment of a fair result and fairness of the procedure of its achievement. Meanwhile, today in science there is no unified approach to the definition of the criteria of general assessment of social interaction fairness, as well as the criteria of procedural fairness assessment.

The mentioned problems determine the relevance of independent doctrinal value and practical interest in the study of procedural justice as an interdisciplinary scientific category. The purpose of this study is to determine the main criteria of fair social interaction, which form a general assessment of interaction fairness, and constitute the theory of procedural justice on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of some aspects of procedural justice in the field of social psychology and conflictology.

In the course of this study it was found that:

1. Procedural fairness in the meaning of objective fairness is understood as conditioned by objective factors the possibility of independent control of the procedure and influence on it by the parties.

2. Subjective content of procedural fairness is the perception of decision-making procedure as a fair form of dispute resolution through satisfaction of personal interest. The revealed connection between the assessment of procedural fairness and making quality decisions, which determines the choice of such procedures, ensures the recognition and enforcement of decisions in the long term.

3. Criteria of fair social interaction that make up the overall assessment of fairness of interaction are the following: the content of social norms, the order (procedure) of their application and compliance with these social norms by participants of social relations.

1. Adygezalova G.Eh. [The development of legal conflictology and the protocol of disagreements as an effective means of resolving legal conflicts]. Sovremennaya nauka: aktual'nye problemy teorii i praktiki. Seriya: ehkonomika i parvo = Modern science: actual problems of theory and practice. Series: Economics and Law. 2018;(8):95–99. (In Russ.)]

2. Gulevich O.A. [Social Psychology of Justice]. Moscow: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences; 2011. (In Russ.)]

3. Mikhel' D.E. [Theoretical and legal aspects of cognition of justice]. Zhizn' prava: pravovaya teoriya, pravovaya traditsiya i pravovaya real'nost': sb. st. po materialam IV Mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. 07 iyunya 2019 = The life of law: legal theory, legal tradition and legal reality: collection of articles based on the materials of the IV International Scientific and Practical Conference on June 07, 2019. Krasnodar: Publishing House of the Kuban State University; 2019. (In Russ.)]

4. Roulz Dzh. [The theory of justice]. Moscow, 2017. (In Russ.)]

5. Khollander-Blyumoff R., Tailer T.R. [The rule of law outside the court]. Mediatsiya i pravo = Mediation and law. 2016;(2(40):21–41. (In Russ.)]

6. Adams J.S. Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology. New York, 1965.

7. Leung K. Cross-cultural study of procedural fairness and disputing behavior. Champaign IL: University of Illinois; 1985.

8. Leung K., Lind E.A. Procedural justice and culture: effects of culture, gender and investigator status on procedural preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986;(50):1134–1140.

9. Lind E.A., Taylor T.R. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York, 1988.

10. Nozick R. Anarchy, State and Utopia. New York: Basic Books; 1974.

11. Pruitt D.G., Carnevale P.J. Negotiation in social conflict. Buckingham, England: Open University Press; 1993.

12. Thibaut J., Walker L. A theory of procedure. California Law Review. 1978;(66):541–566.

13. Thibaut J., Walker L. Procedural justice: a psychological analysis. Hillsdal, 1975.

14. Tyler T.R. Social Justice: Outcome and Procedure. International Journal of Psychology. 2000;35(2):117–118.

15. Tyler T.R. Procedural justice, identity and deference to the law: what shapes rule-following in a period of transition? Australian Journal of Psychology. 2009;(61):32–39.