Abstract
The primary goal of this chapter is to provide a prescriptive framework for the mediation process based upon existing descriptive research. We believe there is a chasm between current dispute resolution research and the mediation practitioner that is similar to the one between negotiation researchers and practitioners up until the early 1980s. Negotiation research then had two major, unrelated directions: the game-theoretic (economic) perspective and the social-psychological perspective. The game-theoretic perspective assumed that negotiators were rational and developed their prescriptions based upon this assumption. Meanwhile, the social-psychological perspective described the interaction of negotiators, dispositional characteristics, and situational influences. The economic models offered untested theoretical prescriptions based on an unrealistic set of expectations of the rationality of decision makers, while descriptive models lacked the insight necessary to tell negotiators how to change their behavior. Thus descriptions lacked prescriptive value and prescriptions were not based on evidence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bazerman, M. H. (1986). Judgment in managerial decision making. New York: John Wiley.
Bazerman, M. H., & Carroll, J. (1987). Negotiator cognition. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 247–288). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bazerman, M. H., Gibbons, R., Thompson, L., & Valley, K. (1993). When and why do negotiators outperform game theory? In R. N. Stern & J. Halpern (Eds.), The role of nonrationality in organization decision making: Current research into the nature and processes of the informal organization. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
Bazerman, M. H., Magliozzi, T., & Neale, M. A. (1985). The acquisition of an integrative response in a competitive market. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 294–313.
Bazerman, M. H., & Neale, M. A. (1983). Heuristics in negotiation: Limitations to dispute resolution effectiveness. In M. Bazerman & R. Lewicki (Eds.), Negotiation in organizations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Bazerman, M. H., & Neale, M. A. (1992). Negotiating rationally. New York: Free Press.
Brookmire, D. A., & Sistrunk, F. (1980). The effects of perceived ability and impartiality of mediators and time pressure on negotiation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 311–327.
Caldwell, D. F., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1982). Responses to failures: The effects of choices and responsibility on impression management. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 121–136.
Carnevale, P. J., & Conlon, D. (1987). Time pressure and mediator strategy in a simulated organizational dispute. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 1–13.
Carnevale, P. J., & Conlon, D. (1988). Time pressure and strategic choice in mediation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 111–133.
Carnevale, P. J., & Mead, A. (1990). Decision frame in the mediation of disputes. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Judgment and Decision Making Society, New Orleans.
Carnevale, P. J., & Pagnetter, R. (1985). The selection of mediation tactics in public sector disputes. Journal of Social Issues, 4, 65–82.
Conlon, D. E., & Ross, W. H. (1992). Influence of movement toward agreement and third party intervention on negotiator fairness judgments. International Journal of Conflict Management, 3, 207–221.
Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–149.
Einhorn, H. J. (1980). Learning from experience and suboptimal roles in decision making. In T. S. Wallsten (Ed.), Cognitive processes in choice and decision behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Fischhoff, B. (1982). Lay foibles and expert fables in judgments about risk. American Statistician, 36, 240–255.
Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Follett, M. P. (1940). Constructive conflict. In H. C. Metcalf & L. Urwick (Eds.), Dynamic administration: The collected papers of Mary Parker Follett. New York: Harper.
Gibson, K. (1989). The ethical basis of mediation: Why mediators need philosophers. Mediation Quarterly, 7, 41–51.
Jones, E., & Davis, K. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 2, 220–266.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.
Kochan, T., & Jick, T. (1978). The public sector mediation process. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 22, 209–240.
Kolb, D. (1983). The mediators. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kressel, K. (1972). Labor mediation: An exploratory survey. Albany, NY: Association of Labor Mediation Agencies.
Landesberger, H. A. (1955). Interaction process analysis of professional behavior: A study of labor mediators in twelve labor-management disputes. American Sociological Review, 51, 566–575.
Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1985). The manager as negotiator. New York: Free Press.
Lewin, K. (1947). Group decision and social change. In T. M. Newcomb & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart &; Winston.
Loewenstein, G., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 426–441.
Murnighan, J. K. (1986). The structure of mediation and intervention: Comments on Carnevale’s strategic choice model. Negotiation Journal, 4, 351–356.
Neale, M. A. (1984). The effect of negotiation and arbitration cost salience on bargainer behavior: The role of arbitrator and constituency in negotiator judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 97–111.
Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1985). The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargainer behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 34–39.
Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1991). Cognition and rationality in negotiation. New York: Free Press.
Neale, M. A., Huber, V. L., & Northcraft, G. B. (1987). The framing of negotiations: Context versus task frames. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 228–241.
Pruitt, D. G. (1981). Negotiation behavior. New York: Academic Press.
Pruitt, D. G. (1983). Integrative agreements: Nature and antecedents. In M. H. Bazerman & R. J. Lewicki (Eds.), Negotiating in organizations (pp. 35–50). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Pruitt, D. M., & Johnson, D. F. (1970). Mediation as an aid to face saving in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 239–246.
Pruitt, D. B., & Kressel, K. (1985). The mediation of social conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 1–10.
Pruitt, D. B., & Rubin, J. Z. (1986). Social conflict. New York: Random House.
Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation. Boston: Cambridge University Press.
Raiffa, H. (1984). Post settlement-settlements. Negotiation Journal, 1, 9–12.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. (1991). The person and the situation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rubin, J. Z. (1981). Dynamics of third party intervention: Kissinger in the Middle East. New York: Praeger Press.
Shapiro, D. L., Drieghe, R., & Brett, J. M. (1985). Mediator behavior and the outcome of mediation. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 101–114.
Shaw, J. I., Fischer, C. S., & Kelley, H. H. (1973). Decision making by third parties in settling disputes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3, 197–218.
Smith, W. P. (1985). Effectiveness of the biased mediator. Negotiation Journal, 1, 363–372.
Thompson, L. (1991). Information exchange in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 161–197.
Thompson, L. (1990). Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 515–532.
Thompson, L. (1993a). The impact of negotiation on intergroup relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 304–325.
Thompson, L. (1993b). They saw a negotiation: Partisan and non-partisan perspectives. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Association of Conflict Management, Belgium.
Thompson, L., & DeHarpport, T. (in press). Social judgment, feedback and interpersonal learning in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
Thompson, L., & Hastie, R. (1990a). Judgment tasks and biases in negotiation. In B. H. Sheppard, M. H. Bazerman, & R. J. Lewicki (Eds.), Research in negotiation in organizations (Vol. 2, pp. 31–54). JAI Press.
Thompson, L., & Hastie, R. (1990b). Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 98–123.
Thompson, L., & Loewenstein, G. (1992). Egocentric interpretations of fairness and negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 176–197.
Touval, S., & Zartman, I. W. (Eds.). (1985). International mediation in theory and practice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Walton, R. E., & McKersie, R. B. (1965). A behavioral theory of labor negotiations: An analysis of a social interaction system. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Welton, G. L., & Pruitt, D. G. (1987). The mediation process: The effects of mediator bias and disputant power. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 123–133.
Young, O. R. (1967). The intermediaries: Third parties in international crises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Young, O. R. (1972). Intermediaries: Additional thoughts on third parties. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 16, 48–53.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gibson, K., Thompson, L., Bazerman, M.H. (1994). Biases and Rationality in the Mediation Process. In: Heath, L., et al. Applications of Heuristics and Biases to Social Issues. Social Psychological Applications to Social Issues, vol 3. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9238-6_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9238-6_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-9240-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-9238-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive