• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


Friendly Persuasion in Civil Case Mediations

0
by Beth Graham

Monday, Nov 03, 2014


Tweet

Professor James A. Wall Jr., Fellow at the University of Missouri School of Law’s Center for Dispute Resolution, and Dr. Suzanne Chan-Serafin, Senior Lecturer at the University of New South Wales, Australia School of Organization and Management, have published an interesting article entitled, Friendly Persuasion in Civil Case Mediations, Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 31: 285–303. In their paper, the authors discuss the results of an observational study that analyzed disputant satisfaction following civil case mediations with a particular focus on 50 mediations during which mediators utilized assertive strategies.

Here is the abstract:

This study investigates why mediators’ assertive strategies — evaluative and directive — did not generate high disputant dissatisfaction when they produced agreements. We thoroughly investigated the transcripts from fifty cases in which the mediators had used assertive strategies and attained agreement. We found that mediators did not irk disputants because the mediators complemented their strategies with four tactical approaches. First, they established their legitimacy, and when mediating they shifted their strategies (from assertive to neutral or vice versa) round by round. They also used a ratchet approach to nudge disputants toward agreement, and they took steps to reduce the disputants’ aspirations.

A copy of this and other scholarly articles authored by Professor Wall and Dr. Chan-Serafin may be downloaded free of charge from the Wiley Online Library.

Photo credit: Malmaison Hotels & Brasseries / Foter / CC BY-ND

Related Posts

  • NCSC Publishes Remote Proceeding ToolkitNCSC Publishes Remote Proceeding Toolkit
  • Disputing’s 2011 Year-End Highlights SeriesDisputing’s 2011 Year-End Highlights Series
  • N.D. of Texas Compels Arbitration and Urges Mediation in Infectious Disease Doctors’ Insurance DisputeN.D. of Texas Compels Arbitration and Urges Mediation in Infectious Disease Doctors’ Insurance Dispute
  • One-Third of Online Retailers in the U.S. Now Require Consumer Arbitration or Restrict Class-Action LawsuitsOne-Third of Online Retailers in the U.S. Now Require Consumer Arbitration or Restrict Class-Action Lawsuits
  • U.S. Supreme Court Enforces Agreement to Arbitrate Discrimination Claims in 14 Penn Plaza v. PyettU.S. Supreme Court Enforces Agreement to Arbitrate Discrimination Claims in 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett
  • ABA 2010 Winners of Mediation Video Contest on YouTube: Honorable Mention (1)ABA 2010 Winners of Mediation Video Contest on YouTube: Honorable Mention (1)

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy