by Christine Webb
Do species other than humans offer solace to victims in conflict situations? Over 3 decades of animal behavior research on consolation—defined as post-conflict affiliation directed from bystanders to recent recipients of aggression1—point to yes. However, the number of species in which it has been formally documented is limited, primarily to the great apes. The implication is that consolation behavior evinces the capacity for empathy. Continue reading
by Peter T. Coleman
The field of mediation is fractured.
Although the research on mediation is considerable and proliferating, our field still lacks a basic unifying framework which provides theoretical coherence and integrates our understanding of various research findings. Today, the research presents a piecemeal understanding of what constitutes “effective mediation” and how to achieve it. Continue reading
by Christine Webb
At a recent workshop at Leiden University on Obstacles and Catalysts for Peaceful Behavior, Nurit Shnabel presented exciting research distinguishing the needs of victims and perpetrators in interpersonal and intergroup conflicts. According to Shnabel and colleagues’ Needs-Based Model of Reconciliation, victims of conflict experience a psychological loss of status and honor, thus undermining their identities as powerful actors. Perpetrators, on the other hand, experience a psychological loss of social acceptance, thus threatening their identities as moral actors. Continue reading
by Kyong Mazzaro
Last February, Human Rights Watch presented the 2013 edition of its World Report. The theme this year: Challenges for Rights After the Arab Spring, How to Build Rights-Respecting Democracies After the Dictator Falls. Two years after the rise of movements that confronted authoritarian regimes and in the context of nascent democracies that are struggling to stabilize, crises in the Persian Gulf, resilient monarchies, and the exacerbation of violence in Syria, this report acknowledges that after the euphoria that followed the fall of dictators, building rights-respecting democracies is a much more complex process. But what are the factors that can make of a revolution an opportunity for democratization? Continue reading
by Roi Ben-Yehuda
A great deal of our most difficult conflicts appear to be identity-based: Israeli vs. Palestinian, Democrat vs. Republican, Christian vs. Muslim, and so on. Identities are pitted against one another in a win-lose fashion. The intransigent nature of so-called identity conflict has understandably lead some to conclude that we must transcend our concerns over identity in order to resolve the deep conflicts that plague our societies. Yet research on identity and conflict resolution suggests that it’s premature to toss the baby out with the dirty bathwater. Continue reading
by Nick Redding
The study of conflict within teams is a hot topic among organization scholars and practitioners. Traditionally, the major distinction in team conflict has been between conflicts about members’ relationships, or those concerning the task of the team. Relationship conflicts are disagreements between members originating in differences in personality or mismatched values and norms for behavior. Task conflicts are specific to the purpose of the team including what is to be done, how it is done, and when it is complete. More recently, a third type of conflict within teams has been identified: process conflict, or conflict over how to proceed with a task. Continue reading
by Christine Webb
In the most recent issue of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Bernhard Leidner and colleagues posit a relation between perceptions of sentience (defined as the capacity to experience emotions) in other disputants and the forms of justice that parties seek in intergroup conflicts. In particular, they contend that the degree of sentience attributed to the opposing party should positively predict a desire for restorative justice and negatively predict a desire for retributive justice. Restorative or retributive notions of justice should then lead parties to prefer diplomatic or aggressive conflict resolution strategies, respectively. Continue reading
by Regina Kim
Shortly after the 9-11 attack, we gathered at the World Trade Center site in New York and the Pentagon to mourn the nearly 3,000 victims of the 2001 terror attacks. We, united as one, praised our heroes, the firefighters and policeman who sacrificed their lives to save those who were in danger and we asked for justice to be done – to capture and condemn Osama bin Ladin. This tragedy also triggered a wave of anti-Islamic feelings or “islamophobia” in the United States. Mosques were burned to the ground and the number of hate groups increased. Continue reading
by Christine Webb
At the recent Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP) conference in New Orleans, a symposium titled Life is an Adventure in Forgiveness: Surprising Lessons in Giving and Gaining Forgiveness offered some unexpected insights. Findings ranged from the risks associated with being too forgiving of interpersonal transgressions to the effectiveness of prayer for forgiveness in close relationships. One particular line of research attempted to unravel the common perception that intergroup apologies are successful at promoting intergroup forgiveness. Continue reading
by Kyong Mazzaro
In September 2012, the United Nations published a general Guidance for mediators working at the international, national and local levels, which identifies eight fundamentals of an effective mediation process: preparedness, consent, impartiality, inclusivity, national ownership, international law and normative frameworks, coherence, coordination and complementarity among mediation efforts, and the development of quality peace agreements. Of all these, it could be said that impartiality or unbiased mediation, being highlighted in research and models of practice as highly desirable, is one of the most debated subjects across the mediation literature. Continue reading
