Psychology’s Place in Mediation

Paul Yang

PS171D

Professor O’Neill
10 June 2017

Psychology’s Place in Mediation

Abstract

        The objective of this research paper is to identify and discuss the various psychological tools and traits that mediators utilize and look out for during the mediation process, and attempt to determine whether or not these tools are effective in producing a fair outcome and creating an amicable environment between two parties. This paper focuses on analyzing self-identity and self-esteem, and how these two can create certain scenarios in mediations, as well as how the mediator should respond to these scenarios. The IDR cycle will be explained in detail, as well as the very processes by which self-esteem and identity are swayed in both directions. Mirroring, reframing, and looping are three specific tools, out of many, that mediators have and which can be useful in cooling down the ego and decreasing psychologically personal involvement in the mediation by both parties, as well as the mediator him or herself. All of this knowledge and use of psychology help underscore the importance of having an arsenal of psychological skills and tools for mediators.

Introduction

        Conflict resolution has been a part of human existence as far as history can stretch, and has produced a myriad of techniques useful in beginning and expediting the process, from litigation to arbitration to mediation. Mediation stands out as a somewhat middle ground between litigation, which requires the conflicting parties to go to court and enter an arduous process of proof presentation, argumentation, and solution selection by a third party, and arbitration, which places the decision of a solution to the conflict entirely into one objective individual’s hands. A basic definition of mediation would be an “interaction between two conflicting parties within a specific situation,” with the unique involvement of a mediator that attempts to aid the two parties to a solution (Eriksson, 5). The mediation process is very particular in that the “interest of the parties, mediators and the overall interest of changing the outcome of the conflict” are all working together, with no one aspect outweighing the others (Eriksson 4). Thus, the approach of the mediator to the conflict and the parties is very important, and can change from case to case. Some cases may require a much more logical approach, turning to the collection and presentation of information to both sides, while others are more focused on persuading either one or both parties towards a certain reaction and decision.

        Therefore, the psychology of mediation is crucial, and the core issues to tackle are found in self-identity and self-esteem. They are often discussed as “a party’s need to ‘save face’ or of a person’s ‘ego’ clouding his [or her] thinking,” which ultimately means that the individuals involved in the negotiation are taking the process and the outcome personally (Bader). This means that they see the outcome of the mediation or negotiation as a reflection of their identity (who they are); thus, it would behoove a mediator to develop certain tools to alleviate any psychological pains that may arise during the process, which would otherwise be an obstacle in the path towards finding a solution to the conflict. Mirroring, which is the reflection of another person’s conduct through imitation and paralleling, as well as looping what an individual said back into the conversation, are a couple techniques used by mediators when trying to diffuse any psychological barriers. Furthermore, the idea of self-identity and self-esteem extends to the mediator him or herself, as self-investment in the case is virtually unavoidable due to the inherent narcissistic nature of human beings. “Self and object constancy,” which is the “capacity for mutual recognition,” is a crucial aspect of mediations that needs to be introduced early on in the process in order to ensure a productive outcome. Overall, it is clear that an extensive knowledge and integration of psychological tools and traits is helpful in creating and supporting a cordial negotiation environment. Mediation’s particular distinction as a dispute settlement negotiation involving a heavily involved third party requires psychological tools that help diffuse tension and push for a more amicable interaction, both between the two opposing parties as well as the mediator and any of the parties involved.

Self-Identity

        In mediation, the ultimate goal is for the two parties in contention with one another to come to an agreement and to settle, with the help of a mediator who is both trying to quell any animosity between the two while still encouraging a frank discussion of both parties’ positions and actions. In order to achieve this apparently contradictory action, the mediator needs to know first of all how to chisel an environment that is conducive to amicable discussion out of one that is bound to be antagonistic from the outset. Thus, the first major tool that the mediator must have in his or her arsenal is the knowledge of self-identity and self-esteem. This is the very foundation upon which all of the other tools stem from, and which the mediator must keep in mind for both parties involved, as well as for him or herself. Even within the very beginnings of the conflict, parts that the mediator has no control over and is merely background information to him or her, the “sense of identity is forged in and these conflicts affect our personhood.” (Eriksson, 7) Self-identity makes the conflict and, subsequently, the process of mediation very personal for the parties involved, and so creates a disposition and desire to win from the get go.

        The parties involved thus find that it is of supreme importance for the self that they come out of the negotiation as a winner, because they believe themselves to be the winner, regardless of what may have occurred in the conflict. The very persons, the identity of the parties involved, are being invested into the process and outcome of the mediation, which makes each of these individuals’ views of what is objective and right very skewed. Therefore, it is very difficult for the parties involved to “hold a stable, mature view of oneself and seeing others as people with both negative and positive characteristics;” instead they tend to view the other party involved in a very negative light (Bader). This is a very immature and, humanly speaking, selfish view, but given the self-preservation orientation that is psychologically hardwired within all humans, it is to be expected. Therefore, it is clear that what the mediator is doing when he or she is working with the individuals in conflict is opening up a view into this lack of maturity and taking the individuals beyond self-identity. It is crucial for the mediator to “understand and learn to encourage the self and object consistency;” the self and the objective should be in line, and the self-identities of the parties should be consistent rather than prone to the sway of emotion and desire (Bader). The mediator should be working with the goal of making the self understood “within the context of human interaction according to the inter-subjective perspective.” (Bader) The “inter-subjective perspective,” in the case of most mediations, would be a perspective that embraces a win-win situation for both parties involved. One practical way that mediators can do bring about the acceptance of this kind of perspective is for the mediator to present privately to the parties the potential losses they can incur of they stay stalwart with their self-focused identities. The momentary isolation allows for the individuals to think candidly about their choices and situation, without the external pressure of the opponent playing with their emotions and self-identity within the context of the mediation. Isolation also provides the mediator a time to gain the cooperation and trust of the individuals. Ultimately, once the selves of both parties understand the need to work together for a better outcome in their shared scenario, cooperation can take place step by step, starting with “insight about [the] conflict and its resolution.” (Bader)