Search results

Purpose
This paper aims to critique the rationalist theoretical framework of international mediation, which ignores emotions in analyzing the decision by conflict parties to pursue a negotiated settlement or continue fighting, and to present an alternative framework that integrates emotions.


Design/methodology/approach
The paper draws on psychology research on emotions and conflict to develop an emotionally informed framework for analyzing conflict parties' decision-making regarding a settlement. It demonstrates the framework's validity and value through a case study of the 2000 Camp David mediation to resolve the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.


Findings
A rationalist approach to mediation does not have adequate explanatory and predictive power theoretically. In practice, it can reduce the prospect of success.


Research limitations/implications
The paper highlights the necessity for mediation researchers to study the effects of emotion, draw on psychology studies on conflict and explore the emotional implications of different mediation strategies and tactics.


Practical implications
The framework highlights the challenge of designing and conducting mediation in a way that cultivates emotions favorable to a settlement and lessens emotions unfavorable to a settlement.


Originality/value
This is the first study, to the best of the authors' knowledge, to critique the rationalist framework of international mediation studies and develop an alternative framework that integrates emotions.

Infrared-reflective (IRR) treatment of automotive glass has been shown to reduce air temperature in vehicle cabins, thereby increasing fuel economy and occupant comfort. Its effect on radiant heat, however, may augment these benefits. In this study, the hypothesis that radiant heat affects subjective comfort ratings in a vehicle was tested. IRR films were systematically applied to the driver-side window of an outdoor stationary vehicle. In Phase 1, cabin air temperature was controlled while participants rated their thermal comfort. In Phase 2, air temperature was adjusted according to participants' responses. Results in Phase 1 showed that the IRR treatment improved thermal comfort on the left forearm, which was exposed to direct solar irradiance, but not whole-body thermal comfort. In Phase 2, participants indicated that they were comfortable at a higher air temperature (mean of 2.5°F [1.4°C]) with the IRR treatment than in the untreated condition. The results indicate that reducing radiant heat via IRR treatment affects subjective assessments of thermal comfort and allows occupants to maintain the same level of comfort in a warmer vehicle cabin. Applications of this research include future implementations of IRR treatment on automotive glass that may lead to greater fuel economy savings and occupant comfort than have previously been estimated.