Mediator neutrality and storytelling order

Fuller, Rex M.; Kimsey, William D.; McKinney, Bruce C.

doi:10.1002/crq.3900100209

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Practically speaking, only one party can be the one to tell their story first, making it impossible for a mediator to act symmetrically. Two studies pointed to the possibility of storytelling order as potential factors that impact perceptions of neutrality (Fuller et al, 1992;Garcia et al, 2004). To address the challenge of equity in storytelling order, other authors have made suggestions such as ensuring relatively equal talk time during the opening story (Domenici and Littlejohn, 2001).…”

Section: Rq2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Neutrality and satisfaction in the mediation session: party and mediator perspectives

Szejda

Hubbard

2019

IJCMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to investigate the relationship between perceptions of mediators acting symmetrically (treating parties equally) and transparently (providing an explanation of past or future behavior) with parties’ assessments of the neutrality of their mediator and satisfaction with the mediation process. Design/methodology/approach This mixed-method study surveyed parties and mediators from 35 naturally occurring mediation sessions at community mediation centers about their perceptions of neutrality, symmetry, transparency and satisfaction. Findings The results showed that parties overwhelmingly assessed their mediators as acting neutrally. Compared to parties’ assessments of mediator neutrality, mediators rated their own neutrality even higher. Symmetry and transparency were both positively correlated with parties’ assessment of mediator neutrality and also emerged as qualitative themes. Speaking order and talk time did not significantly correlate with perception of symmetry. Overall, symmetry appeared to be a more salient factor in parties’ assessment of mediator neutrality than transparency. Both neutrality and symmetry were positively correlated with party satisfaction with the mediation process, but transparency was not. Research limitations/implications The present study provides a foundation for future research in understanding neutrality from both parties and mediators’ perspectives. The primary limitation was a small sample size and possible selection bias in achieving the sample. Practical implications The study found that symmetry and transparency are useful strategies for managing party perceptions of mediator neutrality and party satisfaction with the mediation process. Originality/value This study is one of only a few empirical research studies that investigated the parties’ perspective of mediator neutrality. The study provides a foundation for future research in understanding neutrality from both parties and mediators’ perspectives.

show abstract

Section: Rq2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Neutrality and satisfaction in the mediation session: party and mediator perspectives

Szejda

Hubbard

2019

IJCMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The difficulty with symmetry is not as an ideal, but its translation in practice. Although research on the subject is too limited to draw conclusions, three studies (Fuller et al, 1992;Garcia et al, 2004;Hale and Nix, 1997) point to the possibility of symmetry as a difficulty in practice and a factor in parties' assessments of mediator neutrality. Typical mediation techniques, such as eliciting stories, empowering the "weaker" party, responding to emotions and enforcing ground rules, complicate practicing symmetry.…”

Section: Symmetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In one of the few studies that examined the parties' perspective of neutrality in mediation, Fuller et al (1992) specifically investigated whether storytelling sequence plays a role in influencing party perception of mediator neutrality. The researchers established three experimental conditions using the same conflict scenario, with the same two trained mediators and 24 different volunteer parties who role-played the mediation session.…”

Section: Symmetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Future directions in neutrality research: symmetry and transparency

Fehrenbach

Hubbard

2014

International Journal of Conflict Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the neutrality literature and suggests areas ripe for future research. Design/methodology/approach -The authors reviewed journal articles on the topic of neutrality in mediation, which included theoretical viewpoints and empirical research on practicing mediators' understanding of neutrality. Findings -The review of literature revealed that party perspectives are largely missing from current neutrality literature. Two potential concepts emerged from the authors' review of literature that could potentially influence parties' attributions of mediator neutrality: symmetry and transparency. Symmetry refers to the equal treatment of parties, whereas transparency refers to providing an explanation of past or future behavior. Research on whether symmetry and transparency are key influences on party assessment of mediator neutrality could make a significant contribution to the field. Research limitations/implications -The authors call on researchers with diverse methodological perspectives to examine, from the party's perspective, important questions regarding the meaning of neutrality, mediator strategies to successfully enact neutrality and the impact of neutrality on mediation outcomes. Originality/value -Neutrality is arguably one of the most important concepts to the mediation field. Despite its significance to the field, only limited research has been conducted to better understand how neutrality is enacted in practice. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the literature and provides a launching point for future research.The concept of neutrality is at the forefront of both mediator trainings and guidelines for standards of conduct. Neutrality is often included in descriptions of a mediator (i.e. "neutral third party") and is even sometimes substituted for the title of the mediator (i.e. "neutral"). The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the literature on neutrality in mediation, providing a launching point for future research on this important topic.

show abstract

“…This automatic thought process also shapes and affects the mediator's reactions, suggestions, proposals, and strategies, which in turn influences the outcome of the mediation and potentially favors one party over another. Thus, it has been argued that mediators influence both process and outcome by affecting the legitimacy of each party's point of view through their interventions, determination of the order of speaking, caucusing, and reframing of parties' statements (Fuller, Kimsey, and McKinney, 1992). Nonetheless, it is important to keep in mind throughout this discussion that the degree of influence, and ultimately the power that a mediator can exercise, is likely to vary with the type and orientation of the mediator, as well as the model or approach that he or she employs.…”

Section: What Is Mediation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the theory‐and‐practice gap: Mediator power in practice

Gerami

2009

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although mediators are assumed to be neutral third parties, effective fulfillment of their role involves exercising a significant amount of authority and power. Mediators employ a range of approaches, orientations, and strategies. This article reviews some of the scholarship in this area. It then examines the various dimensions of mediator power, looking specifically at (1) the nature of mediator power and (2) its exercise of power through knowledge and expertise, through designing and controlling the process through reframing, and through imposing pressure to settle. Finally, the article discusses "ethical mediation" in light of mediator power.

show abstract

Mediator neutrality and storytelling order

Abstract: This study investigates disputant perception of mediator neutrality resultingfrom storytelling sequence. Volunteer disputants were mediated in role-play mediation sessions by mediators from the Center for Mediation,James Madison University. Three conditions were identified.

Cited by 15 publications

References 5 publications

Neutrality and satisfaction in the mediation session: party and mediator perspectives

Neutrality and satisfaction in the mediation session: party and mediator perspectives

Future directions in neutrality research: symmetry and transparency

Bridging the theory‐and‐practice gap: Mediator power in practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About