A structured reflection for improving third party interventions and mediation practice: Reconsidering debrief

• Published date: 01 December 2022
• Author: Tzofnat Peleg‐Baker,Michael Lang
• Date: 01 December 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21361

RESEARCH ARTICLE

A structured reflection for improving third

party interventions and mediation practice:

Reconsidering debrief

Tzofnat Peleg-Baker

1

| Michael Lang

2

1

School of Business, Rutgers University,

New Jersey, USA

2

Reflective Practice Institute, Sarasota,

Florida, USA

Correspondence

Tzofnat Peleg-Baker, Rutgers University,

NJ, USA.

Email: inclusiveconflictintl@gmail.com

Abstract

We make a case for structured reflective practice for

improving third-party interventions and mediation

decision-making and outcomes. We propose that a lack

of awareness of the automatic, intuitive nature of judg-

ments that dominate the fast-paced and uncertain

mediation circumstances risk a proper treatment of

implicit social-psychological matters driving conflict

and suitably addressing substantive issues. Implicit

matters include parties' feelings about themselves and

relational and process-related issues. The quality of

intuitive unconscious decisions could improve by con-

scious structured reflective practice. This reflection pre-

sents a learning opportunity to gain an awareness of

unconscious judgments and advance a beneficial inter-

play between conscious and unconscious processing.

To support the significance of conscious, reflective

practice for improving automated decisions in third-

party interventions and mediation, we present the con-

text of mediation and findings on cognitive processing,

intuitive decision-making, expertise, and reflective

practice. Empirical findings in negotiation, manage-

ment, and medicine confirm the effectiveness of struc-

tured reflective practice. A research-based, four-

dimensional Structured Reflective Instrument (SRI)

Received: 30 May 2022 Revised: 29 July 2022 Accepted: 16 August 2022

DOI: 10.1002/crq.21361

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distrib ution and

reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2022 The Authors. Conflict Resolution Quarterly published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly. 2022;40:213–229. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/crq 213

developed by Tzofnat Peleg-Baker is offered. It was

designed to systematically help mediators improve

judgments, particularly the response to implicit media-

tion goals and outcomes. We provide an example of

one dimension of the SRI in the Appendix.

1|INTRODUCTION

Mediators help parties navigate disputes that often become highly emotional within dynamic,

fast-paced circumstances filled with uncertainty. These emotional situations are likely to con-

strain parties' ability to identify and effectively attain significant, intangible, implicit goals and

impair their ability to address substantive issues and to reach a complete and satisfactory agree-

ment. Negotiation research confirms that parties and negotiators are highly interested in

attending to various issues, including implicit social-psychological: feelings about themselves,

relational matters, and process concerns (Curhan et al., 2006). Despite their significance, these

underlying issues are often overlooked (e.g., Bush & Folger, 1994; Charkoudian et al., 2009;

Peleg-Baker, 2012a; Picard, 2002; Winslade & Monk, 2000). Mediators primarily—and in many

instances, exclusively—attend to substantive matters and agreements.

2|THE FOLLOWING ARE SOME CONSIDERATIONS THAT

HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE TRANSACTIONAL NATURE

OF MEDIATION

1. A complex understanding of mediation practice is in its infancy. Mediation is still an emerging

profession with no agreed-upon criteria to assess mediators' work. Mediation literature is

abundant, covering topics such as the advantages of using mediation, mediation procedures,

and various skills, strategies, and styles, yet these models may not be sufficient in a dynamic

world of increasing complexity and uncertainty (Coleman, 2018; Pruitt, 2012; Wall & Chan-

Serafin, 2010). Still lacking is a comprehensive mediation framework for addressing com-

plex, often implicit social psychological dynamics. As mediation becomes widely accepted

and professionalism more in demand, a deeper, more complex understanding of the practice,

including implicit considerations, is essential.

2. Low evidence-base d practice. Despite decades of research with evidence-based practices in the

field of conflict, mediation practice is often notsufficiently evidence-based (Weiner, 2012).

3. Automatic intuitive decisions. Studies of dual cognitive processing and developing expertise

confirm that system 1, automatic, unconscious intuitive judgments dominate expert deci-

sions. System 1 processing relies on the recognition of patterns stored in the memory, while

system 2 processing is conscious, deliberate, analytic, and restricted by working memory

capacity (Bodenhausen & Todd, 2010; Deutsch & Strack, 2010; Evans, 2012). Within the fast

and tense mediation context, judgments are likely to be automatic and tangible goals and

outcomes, such as satisfactory solutions, settlements, or agreements, take priority (Bush &

Folger, 1994; Picard, 2002; Charkoudian et al., 2009; Kressel, 2009) while underlying social-

psychological factors driving conflict are relatively neglected.

214 PELEG-BAKER AND LANG