No abstract

In order to assess the impact of culture on state behavior in international crises, specifically with regard to mediation and its outcome, this study tests hypotheses rooted in both the international relations and the cross-cultural psychology literatures, implementing analysis at both the international-system level and the domestic-state-actor level. At the international system level, the study finds that cultural difference between adversaries affects whether or not mediation occurs during an international crisis but has no effect on tension reduction. At the domestic state actor level, we find that there are certain facets of cultural identity that make a state more or less open to requesting or accepting third-party mediation during an international crisis, but that these facets have no effect on tension reduction.

Cataloged from PDF version of article.When ethnic minority parties are excluded from government coalitions, are group attributes such as religion related to the groups' use of political violence? We argue that extremist factions within minority groups make use of divergence in religion to mobilize support for violent action when the group is excluded from government. Thus, we posit that while religion per se is not a source of violence, extremist elements of ethnic minorities, whose religion differs from the majority, may use religious divergence to mobilize group members to perpetrate terrorism. Specifically we test the hypotheses that extremist factions of an excluded group will be more likely to carry out terrorist attacks when the group's members belong to a different religion as well as when they belong to a different denomination or sect of a religion than the majority. To test these propositions, we use data on ethnic minority party inclusion in government coalitions, ethnic minority group religion, and the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) by matching perpetrators with ethnic groups for all democracies, 1970-2004. © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

No abstract

Summary The difficulties of intercultural negotiations are well established, yet few studies have examined the factors that facilitate the successful resolution of these disputes. This research took a dynamic approach and examined the types of mediation tactics that are most effective in intercultural disputes given specific disputant characteristics. One hundred and ten participants from the United States and Turkey negotiated a community‐based dispute in real time from their respective countries using a newly developed virtual lab. Dyads were randomly assigned to negotiate with a formulative computer mediator, a manipulative computer mediator, or in an unmediated control condition. As predicted, the results showed a significant interaction between manipulative mediation and markers of disputant difficulty on Pareto efficiency. Manipulative mediation produced agreements of higher Pareto efficiency in intercultural dyads with more difficult disputants (low openness to mediation, low motivational cultural intelligence (CQ), low trust, and low willingness to concede) but lower Pareto efficiency in dyads with more favorable disputant factors (high openness to mediation, high motivational CQ, high trust, and high willingness to concede). The results for subjective value also partially supported the hypotheses. Theoretical and practical implications for the study of intercultural disputes are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.