Dialogue as a Tool for Peaceful Conflict Transformation

Pruitt, Bettye Hobbs; Käufer, Katrin

doi:10.1162/152417302760127255

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When dialogue has been evaluated for its effects on international and interethnic conflict, participatory action research and case study designs have been used (Abu-Nimer, 1999Pruitt and Kaufer, 2004;Munyandamusta, Mugiraneza, and Van Brabant, 2005;Noto and others,, 2004;Saunders, 2003;Thillet de Solorzano, 2004). Evaluation methods for UNDP dialogues, which have been termed "situational, reflective and generative," have included participatory action research, case studies, and interviews (Pruitt and Kaufer, 2004;Thillet de Solorzano, 2004). A heuristic approach and emergent design in dialogue evaluation may take the form of "reflective practice," whereby each stage of the dialogue process involves participatory planning in describing the outcomes for the next stage (Munyandamusta, Mugiraneza, and Van Brabant, 2005).…”

Section: Summary Of Methodologies and Research Designsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…McCoy and McCormick (2001) and Pan and Mutchler (2000) collected such data to examines outcomes of Study Circles, one of the most widely implemented dialogue programs. Researchers around the globe have used qualitative interviews to study interethnic conflict (Abu-Nimer, 2004;Munyandamusta, Mugiraneza, and Van Brabant, 2005;Noto and others, 2004;Pruitt and Kaufer, 2004;Saunders, 2003;Thillet de Solorzano, 2004).…”

Section: Summary Of Data Collection Methods and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The contemporary practice of intergroup dialogue has a wide purview, ranging from academic to global arenas (Nagda, Kim, and Truelove, 2004;Pruitt and Kaufer, 2004). Nagda and colleagues are currently engaged in a multiuniversity study examining the outcomes of race and gender intergroup dialogues for student populations (Nagda, Gurin, and Zuniga, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In community, organizational, and interethnic settings, however, use of dialogue techniques has far outpaced any systematic efforts to measure the results of dialogue interaction. Further rigorous evaluation of intergroup dialogue is critical to understand the processes and outcomes involved in dialogue and to improve on the work (Dessel, Rogge, and Garlington, 2006;Hurtado, 2001;Khuri, 2004a;Nagda and Derr, 2004;Pruitt and Kaufer, 2004;Schoem and Hurtado, 2001;Stephan and Stephan, 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of intergroup dialogue: A review of the empirical literature

Dessel

Rogge

2008

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

161

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Practitioners in the developing field of intergroup dialogue seek to address critical social issues of prejudice and intergroup conflict. Goals of dialogue work include relationship building, civic participation, and social change. Outcome evaluation of this work is necessary to further understand the processes and effectiveness of dialogue practices, improve on the work being done, and obtain funding. This literature review summarizes empirical evaluation research in the field of intergroup dialogue and presents a compendium table. Strengths and limitations of current research are discussed, with emphasis on the importance of expanding evaluation work in this field. I ntergroup conflict tears at the fabric of society in numerous ways.

show abstract

Section: Summary Of Methodologies and Research Designsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Summary Of Data Collection Methods and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of intergroup dialogue: A review of the empirical literature

Dessel

Rogge

2008

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

161

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I may not agree, but it makes more sense." In addition to supporting increased efforts to exorcise the "demonization" rhetoric in partisan exchange and better overcome political gridlock (see Greenberg, 2004;De Luca & Buell, 2005), inter-group dialogue is increasingly demonstrating its tangible relevance to actual peace building (Lowry & Littlejohn, 2006;Omalley, 2004;Pruitt & Kaeufer, 2002). While optimistic, such possibilities resonate with conclusions from other researchers as well.…”

Section: Startling Collaborationsmentioning

confidence: 93%

From Culture War to Difficult Dialogue: Exploring Distinct Frames for Citizen Exchange about Social Problems

Hess

Todd²

2008

Journal of Deliberative Democracy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the precise nature of socio-cultural conflict in the United States remains contested, there is growing scholarly agreement that elite (media/governmental) framings may be significantly aggravating public animosities. In order to better understand how actual citizens frame meaningful issues in such an atmosphere, we collaborated as socially liberal and conservative-leaning researchers in a joint study of twenty citizens across the political spectrum, from a conservative pastor and a traditional family advocate to a socialist activist and a leader of a feminist organization. This paper reports our analysis of citizen comments on fundamental problems facing society and their proposed solutions. Themes are organized within three general categories: 1) Talking about citizen exchange: What is the essence of "good" public discourse? 2) Defining social problems: What is the nature of fundamental challenges facing society? and 3) Delimiting solutions: What is the scope of needed social change? Within each category, patterns across citizen comments are identified and explored in light of prevailing stereotypes about "liberals" and "conservatives." Based on this examination, possible shifts in the framing of liberalconservative exchange are proposed as a potential contribution to a more nuanced and productive public deliberation across the partisan divide.

show abstract

From Education to Action: The Immediate and Long-Term Results of Intergroup Dialogue on BSW Students' Social Justice Activity

Lopez-Humphreys

Dawson

2014

Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the effect of intergroup dialogue (IGD) on BSW students’ levels of social justice activity a year after completing the course. Twenty- seven undergraduate social work students on two campuses of a sectarian college completed surveys that ranked their levels of activity along the McClintock Action Continuum immediately after and a year after participating in an IGD program. Students self- reported a significant increase in social justice actions a year after IGD participation. Implications for research and social work education are discussed.

show abstract

Dialogue as a Tool for Peaceful Conflict Transformation

Cited by 3 publications

References 2 publications

Evaluation of intergroup dialogue: A review of the empirical literature

Evaluation of intergroup dialogue: A review of the empirical literature

From Culture War to Difficult Dialogue: Exploring Distinct Frames for Citizen Exchange about Social Problems

From Education to Action: The Immediate and Long-Term Results of Intergroup Dialogue on BSW Students' Social Justice Activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About