Reconciling Allegedly Alternative Mediation Models by Using DIY Models

Abstract

Relying on psychological theory and research about how mediators think, this article discusses how mediators can design optimal mediation models for their individual practices to help them answer the question, “What do I do now?”

The article notes that mediators’ mental models are largely unconscious and consist of mixtures of formal models and personal “mini-theories” of conflict and the role of mediators. Adapting Daniel Kahneman’s framework in his book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, James Wall and Kenneth Kressel argue that mediators’ thinking moves simultaneously along two parallel planes: an intuitive system 1 and a deliberative system 2. System 1 produces “rules of thumb” that mediators can use without much thought. In system 2, mediators consciously identify outcome goals and then engage in “mental mapping” of potential interventions to achieve the goals. Mediators’ success partially depends on whether there is a good “fit” between the parties’ and mediators’ interests and needs from the mediation process.

The article lists numerous goals that parties sometimes have in mediation, and suggests that by helping parties identify their goals and priorities, mediators can better choose appropriate interventions. When mediators are more self-conscious about their goals and potential interventions, they can develop better unconscious routines that they consciously adapt in actual cases. This is the essence of reflective practice. The article includes links to practical resources for mediators.

Keywords: mediation, psychology, practice, practical techniques, goals, priorities, reflective practice, thinking fast and slow, heuristics, rule of thumb, mental mapping