Applied Dispute Resolution Journal: Announcements
The Applied Dispute Resolution Journal (ADRJ) is a peer-reviewed publication dedicated to advancing scholarship and practical insights in mediation, negotiation, conflict resolution, arbitration, and ombudsman practices. As a recognized leader in alternative dispute resolution research, ADRJ publishes innovative studies, case analyses, and policy discussions that shape best practices in the field. ADRJ was originally founded at the University of Alaska by Brian Jarrett, Ph.D. The journal was known as the Alaska Journal of Dispute Resolution, and now affiliated with California State University Dominguez Hills, ADRJ serves as a trusted academic resource for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers. Leading institutions, including Harvard and Stanford, utilize the journal to foster research-driven solutions and ethical advancements in dispute resolution.
May 20, 2026 - Managing Editor’s Message The fall issue on October 1 of the Applied Dispute Resolution Journal (ADRJ) encourages you to engage deeply with the ideas, questions, and innovations presented by our community. The 16th Annual International Cyber Conference brought together voices from across the globe, each offering a unique lens on mediation, negotiation, peacebuilding, and the evolving challenges of our time. These presentations, now captured in written form, provide a rich opportunity to revisit the conversations that shaped the conference and to encounter them anew through thoughtful analysis and expanded insight. Alongside these conference contributions, you will also find compelling work from graduate students, emerging scholars, and seasoned professionals whose research and reflections broaden the scope of this edition. Their articles illuminate the diverse pathways through which conflict resolution continues to grow as both a discipline and a practice. For this cyber conference issue, you’ll find thought‑provoking articles from the following scholars and authors:
ADRJ Fall 2025 Student Edition: ADRJ 2025 Fall Edition - Student Perspectives Issue has launched
ADRJ Fall 2025 Student Edition: ADRJ 2025 Student Perspectives Issue: Editor-in-Chief’s Welcome Introduction
ADRJ Fall 2025 Student Edition: Managing Editor's Message (M.E.M.)
In October 2025, after three years of silence, the Applied Dispute Resolution Journal returns—not as a relic of what was, but as a platform for what’s next. This special Fall edition, Student Perspectives, marks a new beginning: a space where emerging voices meet enduring values. The articles reflect curiosity, courage, and a commitment to ethical practice—qualities that define both the field of dispute resolution and the students who now shape its future. Reviving ADRJ has been a labor of love and conviction. With a new cadre of contributors and editors, we recommit to the journal’s founding principles: fairness, transparency, and academic excellence. May this issue spark dialogue, deepen understanding, and remind us that scholarship is not just about publication—it’s about participation. For this special student issue, you’ll find intriguing articles from graduate students of NCRP: Navigating Genetic Surprises: Emotional and Psychological Best Practices for Family Reunification – Alice Dean. This project looks into the emotional and psychological impact of unexpected DNA results—often called genetic surprises—revealed through at-home testing. It scrutinizes how individuals and families navigate identity disruption, grief, and relational conflict, offering trauma-informed strategies and restorative practices to promote healing and understanding. Enhancing Complaint Handling: A Digital System for Direct Administrator Access – Nicholas Gonzalez. This study examines how digital tools—such as AI, databases, and virtual assistants—can enhance the ombudsman model by improving efficiency and consistency in dispute resolution. It assesses the evolving role of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and considers how technology might support, rather than replace, human judgment while preserving fairness and trust. Beyond the Nile’s Banks: A Conflict That Runs Deeper Than Water – Donna Martini. This essay analyzes the Nile Basin Dispute, tracing how resource scarcity, regional power struggles, and historical grievances have fueled conflict among Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan. It focuses on the geopolitical and cultural significance of the Nile River, highlighting how competing claims to its waters have shaped colonial histories and modern tensions. The AI-Powered Ombudsman: A Boon or a Curse? – Masha Rusanov. This theoretical paper explores how artificial intelligence is reshaping workplace conflict resolution and the ombudsman role. It proposes a hybrid model where AI handles routine tasks while human professionals ensure empathy, ethics, and confidentiality—offering a framework for responsibly integrating technology into dispute resolution. Minority Police Officers in Law Enforcement: The Intersection of Identity and Experience – Yanick Mendes Tavares Varela. This research navigates how race, sexuality, and identity shape the professional experiences of minority police officers, drawing on historical events and personal reflection. It probes the impact of societal tensions on career trajectories and retention, offering insights into strengthening relationships between law enforcement and marginalized communities. Welcome back to ADRJ! Dr. Gerald R. Papica
ADRJ Fall 2025 Student Edition: Selected articles on BPR (Blind Peer Review)
1) Eliminating the Dark Side of Blind Peer Review—A Change Management Perspective Robert E. Levasseur School of Management, Walden University, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Open Journal of Business and Management Vol. 13 No. 1, January 2025 Having peers review manuscripts submitted for publication helps ensure the quality of scholarly journal articles. Blind peer review (BPR), the process traditionally used for this purpose, has well-documented advantages and disadvantages. However, few researchers have addressed the harm inflicted on reviewees directly, and on academia and the quality of peer-reviewed articles indirectly, by misguided blind peer reviewers. In this paper, the focus is on the dark side of blind peer review, what it is, why it happens, and what can be done about it. I describe a constructive blind peer review process (CBPR) that enhances the current BPR process by incorporating the nature of the feedback provided by the reviewer and its impact on the reviewee. I then discuss how to use the CBPR and a modified version of Lewin’s classic three-step change model, the continuous change model (CCM), to identify ways to improve the BPR process and determine strategies for implementing them successfully. Eliminating the Dark Side of Blind Peer Review—A Change Management Perspective 2) Single-Blind Vs. Double-Blind Peer Review - Simple Guide, Matthieu Chartier, Ph.D., Published on 27 April 2022 While the first scientific journal was launched in 1665, the peer review process began in the 1970s and is often considered to be at the core of the scientific method. Peer reviews provide legitimacy and prestige to academic conferences and publications, and are essential to maintaining the trust between scientists and the public. In order for an academic conference to be considered legitimate and to provide value to both presenters and attendees, there must be a thorough peer-review process. Peer review is defined as “a process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field.” (source) Single-Blind Vs. Double-Blind Peer Review - Simple Guide 3) Double-Blind Peer Review: Pros, cons and everything in-between By PAEditorial Updated: 29 October 2021 Double-blind peer review is a process used by scholarly journals where the reviewer’s identity is hidden from the authors and vice versa. Journals typically require removing any author details in the manuscript, including self-citations, acknowledgements and any associated properties attached to the manuscript file. In 2012, the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology published one of the largest studies on peer review. Double-blind peer review was found to be an effective option by 76% of respondents. Styles of peer review have been discussed at length and will continue to be debated in the future. Double-Blind Peer Review: Pros, cons and everything in-between 4) Open versus blind peer review: Is anonymity better than transparency? Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 August 2020 Peer review is widely accepted as essential to ensuring scientific quality in academic journals, yet little training is provided in the specifics of how to conduct peer review. In this article we describe the different forms of peer review, with a particular focus on the differences between single-blind, double-blind and open peer review, and the advantages and disadvantages of each. These illustrate some of the challenges facing the community of authors, editors, reviewers and readers in relation to the process of peer review. We also describe other forms of peer review, such as post-publication review, transferable review and collaborative review, and encourage clinicians and academics at all training stages to engage in the practice of peer review as part of continuing professional development. Open versus blind peer review: Is anonymity better than transparency? | BJPsych Advances | Cambridge Core
ADRJ Fall 2025 Student Edition: The ADRJ Fall Issue Is Arriving – Don't Miss Out!
Welcome to the Applied Dispute Resolution Journal (ADRJ) Student Edition, a vibrant space where fresh ideas, thoughtful discourse, and meaningful activity take shape. As fall arrives, ushering in change, reflection, and renewal, so too does this special edition—celebrating the voices of graduate students as they contribute to the evolving field of alternative dispute resolution. Much like the season itself—marked by transformation, deep learning, and preparation for new beginnings—this edition symbolizes growth, intellectual curiosity, and professional development. Through our double-blind peer review process, contributors have engaged in the rigorous exchange of ideas, refining their work to meet the highest standards of academic integrity and ethical scholarship. For authors, editors, and reviewers, this journey is more than an academic exercise—it is a commitment to collaboration, innovation, and shaping the future of conflict resolution. Whether exploring mediation, arbitration, negotiation, or peacebuilding, each article adds depth to our collective understanding and strengthens ADR’s role in fostering a more just and equitable society. So, as the leaves turn and the air cools, we invite you to read, reflect, and engage with the insights shared in this edition. Together, we embrace knowledge, conversation, and the spirit of learning that makes this season—and this journal—so special.
ADRJ Fall 2025 Student Edition: Fall 2025 Student Edition of ADRJ
We are excited to present the Fall 2025 student edition of ADRJ, featuring insightful research, fresh perspectives, and innovative ideas from emerging scholars in the field of alternative dispute resolution. This issue showcases the voices of students who are shaping the future of mediation, arbitration, negotiation, conflict resolution, and ombudsman practices. Release Date: October 2025 Where to Read: https://journals.calstate.edu/adrj/index Join us in celebrating the next generation of thought leaders in ADR—don’t miss this edition!