Research, projects

In September 2024, SET University in partnership with 4 Visegrad countries have been awarded a grant from International Visegrad Fund to implement a project titled “Digital Innovations for Alternative Dispute Resolution in V4 Countries and Ukraine (DIGARD V4U)”, planned for 2024–2026. The project aims to develop a ready-to-apply awareness on digital innovations of the V4 and Ukrainian actors of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) via analysis of the existing practices, benchmarking necessary competencies and designing and pilot-testing of the online course in English and Ukrainian. It will support Ukraine in its judicial transformations, will share and enrich V4 experience via developing a set of research-based educational tools and materials and their wide promotion. It is a cross-sectoral effort of ADR, digital innovations and educational professionals towards the unique and up-to-date topic relevant for each partner country. The lack of understanding of best practices and availability of suitable technology impacts the scope of collaboration between ADR and IT sectors.

The implementing consortium consists of the following parties:

Hungarian participants:

Tamás Bokor Ph.D., associate professor, Institute of Marketing and Communication Sciences

Zsanett Adámi-Rózsa, doctoral student, Doctoral School of Sociology and Communication

Project context:

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), as mediation, arbitration, and negotiation, has significantly progressed in V4 with technological advancements. ICT, big data, or AI brings opportunities, while the conditions in each country and sector on adoption, diffusion and advancement of digital innovation significantly vary. The ADR professionals need advancement of digital capabilities, e.g. skilled operation and exploitation of the digitized knowledge to ease/support their entrepreneurship, networking, and services for clients. Innovative formats of communication between the arbitration institution and the parties, cybersecurity, speeding up and simplification of procedural rules, use of online platforms do not come into use easily. Professionals face digital literacy, privacy concerns, and the digital divide.

Visegrad Fund

The project is co-financed by the governments of Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia through Visegrad Grants from the International Visegrad Fund. The mission of the fund is to advance ideas for sustainable regional cooperation in Central Europe.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is undergoing a profound digital transformation. Technologies such as Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) platforms, artificial intelligence (AI), and blockchain promise efficiency and accessibility. Yet, this shift raises critical questions about ethics, trust, and legal certainty.

This article offers an overview of current trends, barriers, and practical recommendations, drawing on recent research and insights from Central and Eastern Europe. It also introduces an upcoming scholarly article that delves deeper into these issues.

The study was conducted within the project “Digital Innovations for Alternative Dispute Resolution in V4 Countries and Ukraine” (DIGARD V4U), which aimed to compare contextual information on ADR in each Visegrad country (Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, and Hungary) and Ukraine, as well as assess the current use of digital tools in these areas. The project is supported by the International Visegrad Fund (IVF) (https://www.visegradfund.org/ ).

The scientific study in preparation employed a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative techniques. A structured online questionnaire was distributed among ADR practitioners in five countries—Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary, and Ukraine—yielding 86 responses. The survey captured data on digital tool usage, perceived usefulness, ease of use, and barriers to adoption. To complement these findings, five focus groups (24 participants in total) were conducted to explore attitudes, ethical concerns, and country-specific challenges in greater depth. Desk research was also carried out to compare legal frameworks and regulatory contexts across the region. This triangulation of methods ensured a comprehensive understanding of both statistical trends and nuanced practitioner perspectives.

Digitalization of ADR is not just a technical upgrade; it represents a paradigm shift in conflict resolution. Historically, mediation and arbitration relied on face-to-face interaction, emphasizing trust and empathy. Digital tools challenge this model by introducing virtual environments and automated processes. While these innovations offer efficiency, they risk undermining relational aspects that define ADR. Understanding this tension is crucial for designing systems that enhance, rather than compromise, the integrity of dispute resolution.

Digital tools in ADR include ODR platforms, secure document exchange systems, video conferencing applications, and electronic signature solutions. These technologies became indispensable during the COVID-19 pandemic, accelerating adoption. However, integration into core mediation stages remains limited. Practitioners express concerns about confidentiality, identity verification, and loss of non-verbal cues essential for building trust. General-purpose tools like Zoom and WhatsApp fail to meet professional standards for security and confidentiality, highlighting the need for dedicated platforms tailored to legal contexts.

Our mixed-methods research shows a clear divide: practitioners welcome digital tools for logistical tasks but resist their use in relational stages of mediation. Perceived usefulness (PU) is high for document management and scheduling, while perceived ease of use (PEOU) and trust drop sharply when technology enters the interpersonal domain. Ethical and legal risks—such as data breaches, identity verification challenges, and algorithmic bias—are major barriers to full adoption. This pattern aligns with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which emphasizes the role of perceived usefulness and ease of use in shaping behavioral intention.

Country-specific findings reveal significant variation across Central and Eastern Europe. In Czechia, practitioners show moderate openness to digital tools for administrative tasks but express strong reservations about online mediation due to concerns over identity verification and e-signature validity. Courts remain heavily paper-based, creating procedural friction. Slovakia mirrors this trend but highlights additional challenges in some areas, where infrastructure limits access to secure platforms. Poland demonstrates the highest resistance among surveyed countries, citing procedural rigidity and lack of institutional support as key barriers. Many mediators fear that digitalization could erode professional standards without clear judicial endorsement. Hungary presents a mixed picture: some mediators adopt digital tools readily, while others face infrastructural limitations and scepticism about data security. Ukraine stands out for its proactive approach; National Association of Mediators in Ukraine (NAMU) has issued ethical guidelines for online mediation, and practitioners emphasize geopolitical screening as a unique ethical imperative. These differences underscore the need for context-sensitive strategies that address national legal frameworks, infrastructure, and cultural attitudes toward technology. Practical examples include Czech mediators using hybrid models—digital for document exchange, in-person for negotiation—while Ukrainian mediators integrate secure video platforms with identity verification protocols.

Table 1: Country Summary for Adoption of Digital Tools

*Categories from Katsh, E. E., Katsh, M. E., & Rifkin, J. (2001): amateur, experimental and entrepreneurial

Artificial intelligence is emerging as a tool for enhancing ADR processes, but its role remains limited to supportive functions. Practitioners appreciate AI for tasks like drafting agreements, summarizing case files, and generating negotiation options. However, strong ethical concerns prevent its deployment in core mediation roles. Risks include algorithmic bias, lack of transparency, and potential misuse of sensitive client data. Human oversight is universally regarded as essential to maintain fairness and trust.

Table 2: Examples of concerns and risks related to AI use in ODR

The consensus is clear: AI should assist, not replace, human mediators. Ethical debates focus on accountability: who is responsible if an AI-generated recommendation influences an outcome? Furthermore, transparency in AI decision-making is critical. Without explainable algorithms, trust in digital ADR will remain low.

Several barriers hinder the widespread adoption of digital ADR. These include unclear legislation, insufficient practitioner training, and reliance on insecure platforms. Without robust regulatory frameworks and specialized tools, digital ADR will remain in an experimental phase. Ethical issues, such as data protection and informed consent, further complicate implementation. For example, mediators in Poland report difficulties in ensuring GDPR compliance when using general-purpose tools. Addressing these challenges requires coordinated efforts from governments, professional associations, and technology developers.

To support responsible digitalization of ADR, we propose the following measures:

1. Targeted Training: Practitioners need specialized education in cybersecurity, GDPR compliance, and ethical AI use. Training should include practical exercises on secure platform navigation and risk assessment.

2. Legislative Clarity: Governments should establish clear frameworks for online mediation, including standardized e-signatures and identity verification protocols. Comparative analysis shows that countries with clear digital signature laws experience higher adoption rates.

3. Secure Platforms: Develop dedicated ODR systems that meet confidentiality and data protection standards. These platforms should integrate multi-factor authentication and encrypted communication channels.

4. Hybrid Models: Combine digital tools for administrative tasks with face-to-face interaction for sensitive negotiations. This approach preserves relational integrity while leveraging efficiency gains.

Challenges observed in Central and Eastern Europe mirror those in other regions. In India, for example, weak legal frameworks and uneven digital literacy hinder adoption. Ukraine offers a unique case where NAMU has introduced ethical guidelines for mediators, demonstrating the role of professional associations in bridging regulatory gaps. These examples underscore the universal need for regulatory clarity and capacity-building. Lessons from Canada and the UK show that early investment in secure ODR platforms and mediator training accelerates adoption and builds trust among stakeholders.

A comprehensive research article is currently in preparation under the DIGARD project, which focuses on digitalization in ADR across diverse European contexts. DIGARD aims to develop training modules for mediators, create policy recommendations, and design prototype tools for secure online mediation. This study will analyse practitioner attitudes toward digital tools, explore the application of TAM in ADR, and propose actionable strategies for policymakers and technology developers. By combining empirical data with theoretical insights, the study aims to provide a roadmap for responsible innovation in dispute resolution.

Digital transformation in ADR offers immense potential, but its success depends on balancing efficiency with ethics. Professionals, policymakers, and technologists must collaborate to create secure, transparent, and user-friendly systems. The future of ADR will not be fully digital nor entirely traditional—it will be hybrid, context-sensitive, and guided by ethical principles. We invite practitioners and researchers to share experiences, contribute insights, and help build a future where technology enhances—not compromises—the integrity of dispute resolution.

Acknowledgement

The DIGARD V4U project is co-financed by the governments of Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia through Visegrad Grants from the International Visegrad Fund. The mission of the fund is to advance ideas for sustainable regional cooperation in Central Europe. The aim of the project is to raise awareness of digital innovations in Ukraine and the Visegrad countries in the field of alternative dispute resolution by analysing existing practices, benchmarking the required competencies, and developing and piloting an online course in English and Ukrainian. More about the project: https://ecadr.com/ 

Useful References

Benczes, R., Benczes, I., Ságvári, B., & Szabó, L. P. (2024). When life is no longer a journey: the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the metaphorical conceptualization of life among Hungarian adults–a representative survey. Cognitive Linguistics, 35(1), 143-165. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2023-0050  

Benczes, R. & Béni, A. (2023). Támasz vagy tündérmese? A magyarországi idősgondozó intézmények elnevezési és logóhasználati gyakorlatai. In Kovács, L. (Szerk.) Márkanevek: marketing és nyelvészet határán (pp.111-125). Budapest: Tinta Kiadó.  

Benczes, R., & Kovács, G. (2022). Palatal is for happiness, plosive is for sadness: evidence for stochastic relationships between phoneme classes and sentiment polarity in Hungarian. Language and Cognition, 14(4), 672-691. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2022.23  

Benczes, R., & Ságvári, B. (2022). Migrants are not welcome: Metaphorical framing of fled people in Hungarian online media, 2015–2018. Journal of Language and Politics, 21(3), 413-434. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.20042.ben  

Bozdağ, U. (2024). Framing displaced persons: An analysis of Turkish media’s use of migration metaphors on Twitter. Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 10(1). 117-136. https://doi.org/10.17356/ieejsp.v10i1.1189  

Bozdağ, U., Tóth, T., & Demeter, M. (2024). When articulating populist dichotomies is paramount: Exploring the effects of explicit and implicit populist styles on user engagement in Turkish election tweets. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 102(1) 214-246. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990241284579  

Kövecses, Z., Benczes, R., Rommel, A., & Szelid, V. (2024). Universality versus variation in the conceptualization of anger. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 28(1), 55-79. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-34834  

Kövecses, Z., Benczes, R., & Szelid, V. (Eds.). (2025). Metaphors of anger across Languages: Universality and Variation. De Gruyter Mouton. 

Nagy-Béni, A. (2024). Still the Distant, Exotic Other? The Cultural Conceptualization of Africa in Hungarian Online News. In Cultural Linguistics and the Social World (pp. 57-71). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-6192-0_4  

Szabó, G., Szilágyi, S., & Szabó, L. P. (2024). Morality Combinations: Moral Language in the News Media Coverage of the Ukrainian War at the Time of the 2022 Hungarian Parliamentary Election Campaign. In Managing Moral Emotions in Divided Politics: Lessons from Hungary’s 2022 General Election Campaigns (pp. 171-196). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-67023-7_8  

Szabó, L. P. (2024). Is This Us? The Cultural Conceptualization of Individualization in American Political Speeches. In Cultural Linguistics and the Social World (pp. 93-111). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-6192-0_6  

Szabó, L. P., Benczes, R., Burridge, K., Allan, K., & Lindgren, M. (2025). “Don’t worry, be a senior?” The metaphorical labelling of late-life depression in Australian news media. Text & Talk, (0).  https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2023-0200  

Szabó, L. P., & Szabó, G. (2022). Attack of the critics: Metaphorical delegitimisation in Viktor Orbán’s discourse during the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Language and Politics, 21(2), 255-276. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.21068.sza  

Tóth, T., Demeter, M., Háló, G., Bozdag, U., & Bartóki-Gönczy, B. (2025). Time Matters: What Factors Affect Submission-To-Acceptance Time in the Journal of Communication? Communication Reports, 38(1), 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2024.2424544  

Tóth, T., Demeter, M., Szabó, L. P., & Török, B. (2024). Populist Cues in Media Framing: Exploring How Populism by the Media Emerges in Western News Coverage of Protests. KOME: An International Journal Of Pure Communication Inquiry, 12(1). 141-162. https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.of.13