Identity-b(i)ased intervention of third parties: The effects of social categorization during mediation-arbitration

<p>The present research investigates the effects of social categorization on the intervention behavior of third parties who engage in the hybrid dispute resolution procedure of mediation-arbitration (Ross & Conlon, 2000). Specifically, it was predicted that an affiliation to a disputant le...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: David D Loschelder, Silke Bündgens, Roman Trötschel
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: European Federation of Psychology Students' Associations 2012-05-01
Series:Journal of European Psychology Students
Subjects:
Online Access:https://jeps.efpsa.org/articles/40
Description
Summary:<p>The present research investigates the effects of social categorization on the intervention behavior of third parties who engage in the hybrid dispute resolution procedure of mediation-arbitration (Ross & Conlon, 2000). Specifically, it was predicted that an affiliation to a disputant leads third parties to favor the affiliated ingroup disputant over an unaffiliated outgroup disputant. Two studies support these predictions by demonstrating that unilaterally affiliated third parties engage in ingroup favoritism during arbitration, whereas non-affiliated third-parties (Study 1 & 2) and third parties affiliated to both disputants (Study 2) imposed balanced settlements. In addition to this, both studies identify third parties’ decision control, inherent to the two phases of mediation-arbitration as a relevant moderating variable for the emergence of this effect.</p>
ISSN:2222-6931