This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Keashly, L. Articles by Grant, P. R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Comparative Utility of Third Party Consultation and Mediation Within a Complex Simulation of Intergroup Conflict

Psychology Department, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario NIG 2W1, Canada.

Ronald J. Fisher

Peter R. Grant

University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.

Third party interventions designed to de-escalate intergroup conflict can be differentiated by their underlying assumptions regarding conflict. Process-oriented approaches such as third-party consultation try to de-escalate conflict by taking a subjective emphasis and focusing on the basic relationship between parties, their attitudes, and their perceptions. Traditional third-party interventions, particularly mediation, try to de-escalate conflict by focusing more on the substantive issues in dispute. This study examines how mediation and consultation operate differently within an intergroup conflict simulation. The Intergroup Conflict Simlatllion (Grant, Fisher, Hall, & Keashly, 1990) creates a moderately intense resource and value conflict which involves two equal power groups negotiating for points in a dispute over land divisions. A consultation or a mediation intervention was introduced midway through intergroup negotiations. The results showed that the two interventions did not have a differential impact on settlement of land divisions. Consultation and mediation groups achieved similar point outcomes and were equally committed to and satisfied with the settlement. In contrast, the consultation intervention changed the relationship between the groups. In particular, the groups expressed more positive attitudes and perceptions about the other group and perceived the intergroup relationship as more positive and collaborative after intervention. The implications of these results for third party intervention in intergroup conflict are discussed.

Key Words: intergroup conflict • mediation • third party intervention • simulation

Human Relations, Vol. 46, No. 3, 371-393 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/001872679304600304


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. D. BONTA Conflict Resolution among Peaceful Societies: The Culture of Peacefulness Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 1996; 33(4): 403 - 420. [Abstract]