Intergroup encounters can often become difficult conversations in which power relations and disagreements are perpetuated and re-enacted through the interaction and communication between the participating groups. Thus, especially in asymmetric settings, moral inclusion and moral responsibility toward members of other groups are crucial to dialogue, conflict resolution, and reconciliation. Yet it is exactly the circumstances of asymmetry—involving threat and dehumanization—that pose barriers to the elicitation and sustaining of moral concern. Drawing on and integrating two separate research traditions—the psychology of intergroup conflict, dialogue and peace building, and communication research on “mediated suffering”—this article discusses perceptions, representations, and emotions that underlie recognition of and empathy toward the suffering of others with the aim of increasing our understanding of when and how we can be brought—through mediated and unmediated dialogues and encounters—to care about the suffering of others.
{"title":"Imagine All the People: Negotiating and Mediating Moral Concern through Intergroup Encounters","authors":"Ifat Maoz, P. Frosh","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12189","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12189","url":null,"abstract":"Intergroup encounters can often become difficult conversations in which power relations and disagreements are perpetuated and re-enacted through the interaction and communication between the participating groups. Thus, especially in asymmetric settings, moral inclusion and moral responsibility toward members of other groups are crucial to dialogue, conflict resolution, and reconciliation. Yet it is exactly the circumstances of asymmetry—involving threat and dehumanization—that pose barriers to the elicitation and sustaining of moral concern. Drawing on and integrating two separate research traditions—the psychology of intergroup conflict, dialogue and peace building, and communication research on “mediated suffering”—this article discusses perceptions, representations, and emotions that underlie recognition of and empathy toward the suffering of others with the aim of increasing our understanding of when and how we can be brought—through mediated and unmediated dialogues and encounters—to care about the suffering of others.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12189","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42304237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article reviews intractability qualities and uses the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an example of the difficult conversations that characterize the conflict between competing groups. There are two typical research trends for analyzing group conflict. These are either a rational model or intractable conflict model. The rational model assumes that differences are over realistic issues such as scarce resources. The intractable model focuses on identity and emotions. Intractable conflicts are recalcitrant, nonrational, and particularly resistant to resolution. They generate difficult conversations. The argument here demonstrates how intractability establishes the descriptive conditions for difficult conversations about conflicts. These conditions are incommensurate cultural narratives, narrative particularity, existential threat, power differences, and delegitimization. Islam and the West and the Israelis and Palestinians are used as examples. Finally, such difficult divides must attend to five issues that ameliorate difficult conversations, namely, inclusion, maximization of arguments and reasons, controlling undue influences, dialogic equality, and the value of deliberation.
{"title":"Talking to the Enemy: Difficult Conversations and Ethnopolitical Conflict","authors":"D. Ellis","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12187","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12187","url":null,"abstract":"The article reviews intractability qualities and uses the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an example of the difficult conversations that characterize the conflict between competing groups. There are two typical research trends for analyzing group conflict. These are either a rational model or intractable conflict model. The rational model assumes that differences are over realistic issues such as scarce resources. The intractable model focuses on identity and emotions. Intractable conflicts are recalcitrant, nonrational, and particularly resistant to resolution. They generate difficult conversations. The argument here demonstrates how intractability establishes the descriptive conditions for difficult conversations about conflicts. These conditions are incommensurate cultural narratives, narrative particularity, existential threat, power differences, and delegitimization. Islam and the West and the Israelis and Palestinians are used as examples. Finally, such difficult divides must attend to five issues that ameliorate difficult conversations, namely, inclusion, maximization of arguments and reasons, controlling undue influences, dialogic equality, and the value of deliberation.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12187","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41594470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Understanding Intergroup Conflict Complexity: An Application of the Socioecological Framework and the Integrative Identity Negotiation Theory","authors":"Tenzin Dorjee, Stella Ting-Toomey","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12190","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12190","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12190","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43045137","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Conflicts over important moral differences can divide communities and trap people in destructive spirals of enmity that become intractable. But these conflicts can also be managed constructively. Two laboratory studies investigating the underlying social–psychological dynamics of more tractable versus intractable moral conflicts are presented, which tested a core proposition derived from a dynamical systems theory of intractable conflict. It portrays more intractable conflicts as those, which have lost the complexity inherent to more constructive social relations and have collapsed into overly simplified, closed patterns of thinking, feeling, and acting that resist change. Employing our Difficult Conversations Lab paradigm in which participants engage in genuine discussions over moral differences, we found that higher levels of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral complexity were associated with more tractable conversations. Whereas in a pilot study we examined conflicts that naturally became more/less intractable, in our main experiment, high versus low levels of cognitive complexity were induced.
{"title":"Get Complicated: The Effects of Complexity on Conversations over Potentially Intractable Moral Conflicts","authors":"Katharina G. Kugler, Peter T. Coleman","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12192","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12192","url":null,"abstract":"Conflicts over important moral differences can divide communities and trap people in destructive spirals of enmity that become intractable. But these conflicts can also be managed constructively. Two laboratory studies investigating the underlying social–psychological dynamics of more tractable versus intractable moral conflicts are presented, which tested a core proposition derived from a dynamical systems theory of intractable conflict. It portrays more intractable conflicts as those, which have lost the complexity inherent to more constructive social relations and have collapsed into overly simplified, closed patterns of thinking, feeling, and acting that resist change. Employing our Difficult Conversations Lab paradigm in which participants engage in genuine discussions over moral differences, we found that higher levels of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral complexity were associated with more tractable conversations. Whereas in a pilot study we examined conflicts that naturally became more/less intractable, in our main experiment, high versus low levels of cognitive complexity were induced.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12192","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49326834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Louisa Ha, Yang Yang, Rik Ray, Frankline Matanji, Peiqin Chen, Ke Guo, Nan Lyu
This article examines the news coverage of a nonmilitary conflict: The US–China trade conflict by major news media outlets in the USA and China using the war and peace journalism framework. Role in the conflict as initiator/responder, medium difference, the press role in each press system, and partisanship of news media were hypothesized to affect the war and peace journalism practice. Moreover, the trade conflict was divided into three stages to test the applicability of the “foreign policy market equilibrium hypothesis” by analyzing the changes in the uses of sources and presence of competing frames over time. US news media were found to employ more war journalism and less peace journalism than their Chinese counterpart. They also had much lower coverage of the conflict than their Chinese counterpart. Newspapers were more likely to use war journalism than television. US partisan liberal media selectively supported and opposed the US government trade policy.
{"title":"How US and Chinese Media Cover the US–China Trade Conflict: A Case Study of War and Peace Journalism Practice and the Foreign Policy Equilibrium Hypothesis","authors":"Louisa Ha, Yang Yang, Rik Ray, Frankline Matanji, Peiqin Chen, Ke Guo, Nan Lyu","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12186","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12186","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the news coverage of a nonmilitary conflict: The US–China trade conflict by major news media outlets in the USA and China using the war and peace journalism framework. Role in the conflict as initiator/responder, medium difference, the press role in each press system, and partisanship of news media were hypothesized to affect the war and peace journalism practice. Moreover, the trade conflict was divided into three stages to test the applicability of the “foreign policy market equilibrium hypothesis” by analyzing the changes in the uses of sources and presence of competing frames over time. US news media were found to employ more war journalism and less peace journalism than their Chinese counterpart. They also had much lower coverage of the conflict than their Chinese counterpart. Newspapers were more likely to use war journalism than television. US partisan liberal media selectively supported and opposed the US government trade policy.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12186","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43282469","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Linda L. Putnam, Mara Olekalns, Donald E. Conlon, C. D. De Dreu
As colleagues and collaborators, we reflect on the work and legacy of Peter Carnevale, currently professor at the University of Southern California, and recipient of the 2002 Jeffrey Z. Rubin Theory-to-Practice Award of the International Association for Conflict Management (IACM). We review Carnevale’s main contributions, including his work on time pressure and surveillance, strategies for mediation, emotions in negotiation, and the use and integration of distinct methods for studying conflict and negotiation. We share personal anecdotes from our time as PhD students and collaborators with Peter Carnevale, and we touch on lessons learned for doing science and mentoring the next generation.
{"title":"From the Field to the Laboratory: The Theory-Practice Research of Peter J. Carnevale","authors":"Linda L. Putnam, Mara Olekalns, Donald E. Conlon, C. D. De Dreu","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12185","url":null,"abstract":"As colleagues and collaborators, we reflect on the work and legacy of Peter Carnevale, currently professor at the University of Southern California, and recipient of the 2002 Jeffrey Z. Rubin Theory-to-Practice Award of the International Association for Conflict Management (IACM). We review Carnevale’s main contributions, including his work on time pressure and surveillance, strategies for mediation, emotions in negotiation, and the use and integration of distinct methods for studying conflict and negotiation. We share personal anecdotes from our time as PhD students and collaborators with Peter Carnevale, and we touch on lessons learned for doing science and mentoring the next generation.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12185","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46368610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"When there is No ZOPA: Mental Fatigue, Integrative Complexity, and Creative Agreement in Negotiations","authors":"Jingjing Yao, Zhi-Xue Zhang, L. Liu","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12178","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12178","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46209612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
K. Muir, A. Joinson, Emily Collins, R. Cotterill, Nigel Dewdney
Strategic word mimicry during negotiations facilitates better outcomes. We explore mimicry of specific word categories and perceptions of rapport, trust, and liking as underlying mechanisms. Dyads took part in an online negotiation exercise in which word mimicry was manipulated: Participants were instructed to mimic each other’s words (both-mimic), one participant mimicked the other (half-mimic), or neither participant mimicked (neither-mimic). When given a simple instruction to mimic their partner, participants mimicked both the style (personal pronouns, adverbs, linguistic style, interrogative terms) and the content (affiliation terms, power terms, and assents) of their partner’s messages. Mimicry was associated with greater joint and individual points gain and perceptions of rapport from the mimicked partner. Further, mimicry of inter-rogative terms (e.g., how, why) mediated positive effects of mimicry upon negotiation outcomes, suggesting the coordination of question asking between negotiators is an important strategy to create beneficial interactions and add value in negotiations.
{"title":"When Asking “What” and “How” Helps You Win: Mimicry of Interrogative Terms Facilitates Successful Online Negotiations","authors":"K. Muir, A. Joinson, Emily Collins, R. Cotterill, Nigel Dewdney","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12179","url":null,"abstract":"Strategic word mimicry during negotiations facilitates better outcomes. We explore mimicry of specific word categories and perceptions of rapport, trust, and liking as underlying mechanisms. Dyads took part in an online negotiation exercise in which word mimicry was manipulated: Participants were instructed to mimic each other’s words (both-mimic), one participant mimicked the other (half-mimic), or neither participant mimicked (neither-mimic). When given a simple instruction to mimic their partner, participants mimicked both the style (personal pronouns, adverbs, linguistic style, interrogative terms) and the content (affiliation terms, power terms, and assents) of their partner’s messages. Mimicry was associated with greater joint and individual points gain and perceptions of rapport from the mimicked partner. Further, mimicry of inter-rogative terms (e.g., how, why) mediated positive effects of mimicry upon negotiation outcomes, suggesting the coordination of question asking between negotiators is an important strategy to create beneficial interactions and add value in negotiations.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12179","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43803065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：