GearBi: Towards an online arbitration environment based on the design principles simplicity, awareness, orientation, and timeliness

• Blanchard R. E. (1993). Situation awareness–transition from theory to practice. In: Proc. of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society: 32nd Annual Meeting. Santa Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Monica, CA, pp. 39–42.

• Carroll J. M., Neale D. C., Isenhour P. L., Rosson M. B., McCrickard D. S. (2003), Notification and Awareness: Synchronizing task-oriented collaborative activity. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58(5):605–632

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Chi, E. H. P. and Pirolli, J. Pitkow (2000). The scent of a site: a system for analyzing and predicting information scent, usage, and usability of a Web site, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 161–168, April 01–06, 2000, The Hague, The Netherlands.

• Dufner, D., Kwon, O. and Hadidi, R. (1999). Web-CCAT: A collaborative learning environment for geographically distributed information technology students and working professionals. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 1, No.␣12, March 1999.

• E-Arbitration-T (2002). E-Arbitration-T Project: An Alternative Dispute Resolution for SMEs. World Arbitration Newsletter, Number 2, June 2002. Available at http://www. e-global.es/arbitration

• Endsley M. R. (1995). Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems. Human Factors 37(1):32–64

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Grover, A. (2002). More Security is Needed For Online ADR Applications, 20 Alternatives to High Cost Litig. 135

• Gutwin, C. and Greenberg S. (1998). Effects of awareness support on groupware usability, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pp.␣511–518, April 18–23, 1998, Los Angeles, California, United States.

• Hill, R. (1999), Online arbitration: Issues and Solutions, Arbitration International, April 1999 issue, <http://www.umass.edu/dispute/hill.htm>

• Hunt, A. and Thomas, D. (2000). The Pragmatic Programmer. Addison–Wesley.

• Katsh E., Rifkin J. (2001) Online Dispute Resolution: Conflict Resolution in Cyberspace. Jossey-Bass 2001, San Francisco

  Google Scholar 

• Kaufmann-Kohler G., Schultz T.(2004) Online Dispute Resolution: Challenges for Contemporary Justice. Kluwer Law International, The Hague

  Google Scholar 

• Lodder, A. R. and Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2004). ‘Online Arbitration Services at a Turning Point: An Appraisal’, ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin, Special Supplement ‘Using Technology to Resolve Business Dispute, pp. 35–42.

• Lodder, A. R. and Huygen, P. E. M. (2001). ‘eADR: A Simple Tool to Structure the Information Exchange Between Parties in Online Alternative Dispute Resolution’. In Verheij, B. et al. (eds.), JURIX 2001, IOS Press, pp. 117–129.

• Lodder A. R. (1999). DiaLaw. On Legal Justification and Dialogical Models of Argumentation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London

  Google Scholar 

• Lodder, A. R. (2004). ‘Information Security & Online Dispute Resolution’, Proceedings of Symposium Putting ICT into dispute resolution practice, London, September 6, 2004.

• Nakano R. (2001) Web Content Management: A Collaborative Approach. Addison–Wesley, Boston

  Google Scholar 

• Online Arbitration: What Technology can do for Arbitral Institutions. Introductory document for a January 20th 2003 one-day seminar organized by the E-Arbitration-T consortium.

• Oskamp, A., Lodder, A. R. and Apistola, M. (eds.) (2004). IT Support of the Judiciary: Australia, Singapore, Venezuela, Norway, The Netherlands and Italy, TMC Asser Press/Cambridge University Press.

• Philippe, M. (2004). ‘NetCase: A New ICC Arbitration Facility’, ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin, Special Supplement ‘Using Technology to Resolve Business Dispute’, pp. 53–58.

• Preece J., Rogers Y., Sharp H. (2002) Interaction Design: Beyond Human–Computer Interaction. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY

  Google Scholar 

• Rule C. (2002) Online Dispute Resolution for Businesses. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco Ca

  Google Scholar 

• Schäfer, E. (2003). ‘Videoconferencing in arbitration’, ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin, Vol. 14, No. 1, Spring, pp. 35–45

• Schäfer, E. (2004). ‘IT in Arbitration: The Work of the ICC Task force’, ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin, Special Supplement ‘Using Technology to Resolve Business Dispute, pp. 59–62.

• The Standards, Operating Standards for Using IT in International Arbitration (2004). ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin, Special Supplement ‘Using Technology to Resolve Business Dispute, pp. 75–98.

• Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (1993). Studies in Defeasible Argumentation. PhD thesis, Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

• Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2003). ‘A Simple Scheme to Structure and Process the Information of Parties in Online Forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution’, ADR Online Monthly, October 2003.

• Wahab M. (2004) The Global Information Society and Online Dispute Resolution: A New Dawn for Dispute Resolution. Journal of International Arbitration 21(2):143–168

  Google Scholar 

• Yu H., Motassem N (2003) Can Online Arbitration Exist Within the Traditional Arbitration Framework. Journal of International Arbitration 20(5):455–473

  Google Scholar 

Download references