This article applies the dispute processing model developed by Felstiner, Abel, and Sarat (1980–81) to disputing between patients and doctors. We conducted interviews with 240 dissatisfied patients to examine the dispute resolution choices they made in response to unsatisfactory medical experiences. Probit models were constructed for each of five resolution choices, incorporating independent variables derived form the Felstiner et al. conceptual model. These analyses go beyond previous studies of medical malpractice by (a) presenting a comparative analysis of suers and nonsuers, (b) not relying on closed malpractice case data, and (c) presenting the perspective of aggrieved patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.