Suchergebnisse

This study tested the hypothesis that partisanship influences judgments of fairness and trustworthiness in the mediation of social conflict. Subjects evaluated third party proposals for resolving the conflict in Jerusalem. A2×2×4 factorial design examined (1) partisanship of the subject, either partisan (pro-Israeli) or nonpartisan (neutral); (2) content bias of third party proposals, where the substance of the proposal was either (a) pro-Israeli or (b) evenhanded; and (3) source bias, where the third party was labeled as being (a) pro-Israeli, (b) pro-Palestinian, (c) neutral, or (d) of unknown persuasion. Analyses of judgments of fairness and third party trustworthiness indicated differences between partisan and nonpartisan subjects in self-serving bias and underlying dynamics in judgments. Partisans used favorableness of the proposals to judge the trustworthiness of the third party, independent of evenhandedness of the proposal, whereas evenhandedness was the criterion for nonpartisans. Nonpartisans trusted the neutral third party and partisans trusted the pro-Israeli third party regardless of proposal fairness. Partisans showed a cushioning effect of third party characteristics: a pro-Israeli third party who made an evenhanded proposal (relatively unpalatable to the pro-Israeli subjects) was trusted more than a pro-Palestinian third party who made the same proposal. The results highlight practical problems in mediation where the third party may need the trust not only of the disputing parties but also the trust of nonpartisan others. Evenhanded third party behavior that may impress nonpartisans is likely to be seen as biased mediation by disputants.

Examines whether framing negotiator payoffs in terms of gains or losses affects a mediator's behavior toward negotiators when the mediator has no personal frame. A computer-based experiment was conducted in which Ss (N = 127 male college students) acted as mediators between 2 disputants in an integrative bargaining task. As predicted, Ss proposed settlements of higher joint value when both disputants had loss frames than when both had gain frames, supporting the psychophysical explanations. Moreover, within mixed-framed disputes, Ss' proposals favored the loss-framed bargainer over the gain-framed bargainer. However, predicted interactions between bargainer frame & concession-making activity were not supported. Implications of the results for real bargainers & mediators are discussed. 2 Tables, 28 References. Adapted from the source document.

Intro -- CONTENTS -- Contributors -- Methods of Negotiation Research: Introduction --- PETER J. CARNEVALE and CARSTEN K.W. DE DREU -- Methods of Negotiation Research II --- PETER J. CARNEVALE and CARSTEN K.W. DE DREU -- The Joys of Field Research --- JAMES A. WALL, JR. -- How Much Do We Know About Real Negotiations? Problems in Constructing Case Studies --- DAVID MATZ -- Studying Negotiations in Context: An Ethnographic Approach --- RAY FRIEDMAN -- The Problem-Solving Workshop as a Method of Research --- RONALD J. FISHER -- Time-Series Designs and Analyses --- DANIEL DRUCKMAN -- Social Research and the Study of Mediation: Designing and Implementing Systematic Archival Research --- JACOB BERCOVITCH -- Reflections on Simulation and Experimentation in the Study of Negotiation --- JONATHAN WILKENFELD -- Quantitative Coding of Negotiation Behavior --- LAURIE R. WEINGART, MARA OLEKALNS and PHILIP L. SMITH -- The Use of Questionnaires in Conflict Research --- AUKJE NAUTA and ESTHER KLUWER -- A Multilevel Approach to Investigating Cross-National Differences in Negotiation Processes --- XU HUANG and EVERT VAN DE VLIERT -- Methodological Challenges in the Study of Negotiator Affect --- BRUCE BARRY and INGRID SMITHEY FULMER -- Comparative Case Studies --- I. WILLIAM ZARTMAN -- Discourse Analysis: Mucking Around with Negotiation Data --- LINDA L. PUTNAM -- Field Experiments on Social Conflict --- DEAN G. PRUITT -- Laboratory Experiments on Negotiation and Social Conflict --- PETER J. CARNEVALE and CARSTEN K.W. DE DREU -- Managing Conflict in the Literature: Meta-analysis as a Research Method --- ALICE F. STUHLMACHER and TREENA L. GILLESPIE -- When, Where and How: The Use of Multidimensional Scaling Methods in the Study of Negotiation and Social Conflict --- ROBIN L. PINKLEY, MICHELE J. GELFAND and LILI DUAN.

This article describes how laboratory experiments are used by social psychologists & those in related fields to study conflict, negotiation, & mediation. In a laboratory experiment, the researcher experimentally controls one or more variables in controlled, artificial settings that induce processes likely to occur naturally. Laboratory experiments are the primary method used to establish cause-&-effect relationships among variables & to reduce alternative explanations; thus they are primarily concerned with validity of explanation. In this article, we describe several basic design features including conceptual replication, precise manipulation, & the use of a moderator variable, which all help assess the processes underlying a research finding. These design features foster conceptual internal validity, which describes the impact of one variable on another & the quality of such an explanation. Conceptual internal validity provides a basis for generalization of findings & thus new research. It also fosters strong inference, which helps build cumulative knowledge. Laboratory experiments are not well suited to answer all questions & problems -- for example, they may not produce deep understanding of a particular historical event & must be supplemented by other methods, such as surveys & case studies. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.