chevron-down Created with Sketch Beta.

Just Resolutions

February 2025 – Court ADR Committee

Setting Up Self-Represented Litigants for Success with Court Online Dispute Resolution Resources

Stephen Sullivan and Jasmine Henry

Setting Up Self-Represented Litigants for Success with Court Online Dispute Resolution Resources
FG Trade via Getty Images

Jump to:

Imagine you are Jane Roe — a self-represented litigant (SRL) facing a small claims dispute advanced by your former business partner, John Doe. You receive a notice in the mail from Home County Court telling you to use online dispute resolution (ODR) to try to settle your case before the scheduled court appearance. It sounds like it could be a good option, but you have no idea what ODR involves. You turn to the court’s resources, seeking more information.

Many Americans find themselves in Jane Roe’s situation. A 2015 report found that 76% of civil cases in state courts involved at least one SRL, usually the defendant, who must navigate their case with limited legal knowledge. Meanwhile, overall average literacy for U.S. adults decreased between 2017 and 2023. The majority of the U.S. population (56%) cannot read at an advanced level. Regrettably, many Americans also find themselves distrustful of currently available court ODR resources, in part because it is new to them and possibly confusing to understand, according to research conducted by Resolution Systems Institute (RSI). Thus, to better reach low-literacy individuals, courts are advised to provide resources written at a fifth-grade reading level and in a conversational style.

RSI conducted focus groups and usability testing across the United States and found that Jane’s situation could unfold in two disparate ways. In the first scenario, Jane encounters court resources that confuse her and decrease her trust; here, we will highlight findings from RSI’s focus groups showing that fears about the security and legitimacy of court documents can decrease participant trust and comfort. In the second scenario, Jane interacts with redesigned court materials that explain the process and steps clearly and concisely; here, we will highlight findings from RSI’s recent usability testing sessions demonstrating that simple materials build participants’ confidence and trust in ODR. By exploring participant’s experiences of and reflections on navigating the materials as Jane, we will illuminate various insights into effective court communications.

Background

This article is based on research conducted for our ODR Party Engagement (OPEN) Project. For this project, RSI first conducted focus groups to understand how individuals perceive the trustworthiness and legitimacy of court communications about ODR. RSI then worked with an inclusive designer and an accessibility evaluator to create new communication materials — a notice, a website, a video and an interactive guide — to address the concerns of focus group participants.

Our most recent step was to run these new court resources through usability tests across the country with 20 total participants in five different locations: a rural town in New Hampshire; Baltimore, MD; Santa Fe and Española, NM; and Philadelphia, PA. The usability testers were demographically diverse: Nine identified as Black or African American, five identified as Hispanic or Latino, and five identified as White. Participants ranged in age from 27 to 67, all had an income less than $50,000, and 15 had earned a high school diploma or less.

Participants were presented with Jane’s situation. They were asked to step into her shoes and complete a series of tasks using the materials: reviewing the Notice of ODR to Defendants that they received with a summons, navigating the Home County Court ODR website, watching the informational video, using the Guide for Defendants and signing up for an account. By taking observational notes and asking follow-up questions, we obtained immediate feedback on how “Jane” felt about the materials and process overall.

Scenario 1

What might happen if Jane Roe is sued in small claims court and does not trust the court resources she receives? Envision Jane opening her mail and seeing a Notice to Defendants and a Summons. She probably feels overwhelmed, much like the participants of our initial focus group. Perhaps the stress of her prosecution is compounded by difficulties reading and understanding the dense text filling the Notice.

Maybe, like many others, Jane is concerned that the legitimate court documents are sophisticated scam mailers. She scans the materials for a phone number to verify the legitimacy of her case before proceeding to the ODR website listed. Unable to find a number, she decides to ignore the Notice and Summons, throwing it out and waiting for a second copy to arrive before realizing the case is real.

If Jane figures out how to get to the ODR website, she might initially think that it looks like a scam site. She is concerned that the ODR webpage does not have a .gov ending. Jane starts worrying she is going to give her computer a virus. She sees the option to sign in via Facebook and feels leery about her personal information being compromised if she were to register that way. The exclusion of a seal to match the court’s main website amplifies her skepticism regarding the security of the ODR website.

Further, Jane is confused by other aspects of the court resources. The ODR resources have too many options and Jane has difficulty identifying what her next step should be. Testimonials and social media buttons on the ODR website make it feel unprofessional. Jane longs for someone to help her but cannot find legal or court contacts in the printed or online documents.

Unfortunately, in this first scenario, Jane’s circumstances do not set her up for success. In fact, her feelings of overwhelm and trepidation could cause her to avoid acting in her case. She could fully withdraw from the negotiation process. In the worst case scenario, the conflict between Jane Roe and John Doe could extend for months after the missed opportunity to use ODR, unnecessarily stressing both parties and depleting limited court resources.

Scenario 2

What if, instead, Jane receives an ODR notice and court materials that make her feel comfortable and supported? This time, Jane opens the mail to find a Notice to Defendants with the court’s name, address and seal at the top. Scanning two short introduction paragraphs, she reads that she has to use something called Online Dispute Resolution to try and settle her small claims case. She grows frustrated by the situation … until she inspects the rest of the court document. Then she starts to think that maybe, just maybe, this will not be too bad.

Figure 1: Section of the digital Notice to Defendants of Mandatory ODR

Figure 1: Section of the digital Notice to Defendants of Mandatory ODR

She scans her three-page Notice, which is written in plain language and has plenty of white space, so as not to overwhelm. Reading the bullet points on the first page, Jane learns the basic details of what ODR involves (Figure 1). She is excited about the opportunity to try to settle her case instead of going to court. Flipping to the second page, Jane sees step-by-step instructions explaining how to register for ODR. She is happy to find legal aid information on the third page and is relieved that there is a phone number to call in case she needs assistance.

Having flipped through the whole Notice, Jane turns back to the first page. She is excited to see a QR code for the ODR website in the bottom right corner; Jane normally uses her phone to access the internet, and QR codes are the most convenient way of navigating to a webpage on her phone. After opening the court’s ODR website (Figure 2), Jane first reviews an initial blurb describing ODR. The information mirrors what was included in the notice, but she finds the repetition helpful.

Figure 2: Screenshot of the Home County Court mobile homepage

Figure 2: Screenshot of the Home County Court mobile homepage

Her attention quickly diverts to the embedded informational video, just below the banner. She clicks play. A narrator describes the most important parts of ODR over images of a diverse set of characters, including a plaintiff, a defendant and a mediator, attempting to resolve their own case. The video walks Jane through the process, step by step, and addresses her major questions. Jane finds the short video both comprehensive and engaging.

Closing the video, Jane next reviews a section of the homepage dedicated to ODR safety, confidentiality and data privacy. She appreciates the prominence of this information — it assuages her fears about sharing sensitive information over online platforms and affirms that the court takes these issues seriously. Furthermore, the information is easy to navigate; Jane finds that the plus signs are simple and reliable visual indicators that section items are expandable. This section enhances Jane’s trust in the materials, boosting her confidence in the process.

Armed with a basic understanding of the ODR process, Jane feels assured enough to continue exploring the court’s resources. She navigates to the Guide for Defendants to learn how to prepare for ODR in her case. She finds an informative and interactive seven-step form; text fields allow her to list important documents needed, calculate a payment offer, and consider terms other than money to offer the plaintiff. Whether or not she feels she owes John anything, when she finishes the guide, she feels even more confident in her ability to reach an agreement with ODR and avoid going to court.

Finally, with knowledge of how ODR works and the deadline to register, Jane signs up for an account. She clicks the bright red “Start ODR” button, which is visible on every page. Even though she is not technologically savvy, Jane finds the account registration pages are easy to navigate. Upon completing the final step, Jane feels more confident than before that she is in a good position to try to negotiate with the other person.

In the second scenario, Jane’s experience sets her up for success. This is largely because she uses materials that are created for individuals like her. Having a positive experience with the materials also enhances her understanding of and enthusiasm for ODR in general; Jane imagines that individuals from other backgrounds and abilities could also benefit from trying to resolve their cases through this program.

Conclusion

Our focus groups showed us the importance of having clear and simple ODR documents. We learned that if litigants (like Jane) found the materials to be untrustworthy or complicated, then they would not use them. And we learned that people want to easily find more information and help. Our usability testing displayed how courts could address misunderstandings surrounding legitimacy and therefore increase participant confidence and trust. When information about data privacy and confidentiality protections on ODR applications are sufficiently highlighted, users feel more at ease. Resources for ODR programs are most effective at encouraging party participation when they include step-by-step instructions and are simply worded, intuitive and strategically repetitive.

The full report and communication material templates will be available on Resolution Systems Institute’s dedicated OPEN website, odr.aboutrsi.org, in March 2025.

RSI is grateful to the American Arbitration Association-International Centre for Dispute Resolution Foundation for its financial support for the OPEN (ODR Party Engagement) Project.

 

    Authors