Identity-b(i)ased intervention of third-parties: The effects of social categorization during mediation-arbitration
Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet
Standard
in: Journal of European Psychology Students (JEPS), Jahrgang 3, Nr. 1, 06.05.2012, S. 24-38.
Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Identity-b(i)ased intervention of third-parties
T2 - The effects of social categorization during mediation-arbitration
AU - Loschelder, David Demian
AU - Bündgens, Silke
AU - Trötschel, Roman
PY - 2012/5/6
Y1 - 2012/5/6
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Psychology
U2 - 10.5334/jeps.ap
DO - 10.5334/jeps.ap
M3 - Journal articles
VL - 3
SP - 24
EP - 38
JO - Journal of European Psychology Students (JEPS)
JF - Journal of European Psychology Students (JEPS)
SN - 2222-6931
IS - 1
ER -