Search results

This observational and interview study investigated the role of caucusing (private meetings between the mediator and a disputant) in community mediation. The results from 73 cases at two mediation centers indicate that mediators are more likely to caucus when disputants have a history of escalation, are hostile toward each other during the hearing, and fail to engage in joint problem solving. Caucus sessions were found to discourage direct hostility between the disputants but to encourage indirect hostility. There was also evidence that caucus sessions foster disputant flexibility and problem solving between the disputant and the mediator. However, no relationship was found between the occurrence or nature of caucusing and the likelihood of agreement or the quality of the mediated outcome.

This research examined the relationships among a number of outcomes of mediation. The sample consisted of 73 hearings at two dispute settlement centers in New York State. Predictions from goal achievement theory were contrasted with predictions from procedural justice theory. In accordance with goal achievement theory, disputants who attained their goals in the agreement indicated immediate satisfaction with that agreement and with the conduct of the hearing. However, goal achievement was unrelated to long‐run success or long‐run satisfaction with the agreement, a result which may apply primarily to the mediation of interpersonal disputes. The predictions from procedural justice theory were more successful. Disputants who perceived that the underlying problems had been aired, that the mediator had understood what they said and that they had received a fair hearing also showed immediate satisfaction with the agreement and with the conduct of the hearing. In addition, these and related perceptions—especially in the eyes of the respondent—were predictive of several aspects of long‐run success.

Literature on power differentials within mediation sessions has indicated that when power imbalances are too great, mediation is not the proper venue for the resolution of these disputes. However, when there is not an incapacitating imbalance, it is possible that mediators can take steps to rectify this situation. A field study was conducted at two community dispute settlement centers in New York State, with the proceedings of 73 actual cases transcribed and then coded to: (1) determine the impact of unequal power on the outcome of interpersonal mediation; (2) examine how mediators deal with unequal power; (3) assess the impact of mediator efforts to balance power discrepancies, and (4) determine the impact of disputant characteristics on differences in power and outcome. It was found that the mediators in the present study did attempt to remedy power imbalances: by encouraging the more passive disputant to participate more in the hearing by criticizing aggressive disputants, and by asking embarrassing questions of more argumentative disputants and those taking a determined principled stance. However, contrary to expectations, it was found that mediator efforts to balance power discrepancies were not successful, power discrepancies did not lead to unequal agreements, and being a female or a minority did not lead to an unfair outcome.

Extending on flow theory, the purpose of this paper is to explore how interactivity (human-to-human interactivity and human-to-machine interactivity) and personal beliefs (perceived attractiveness, personal involvement, and perceived uncertainty) impact flow experience; this study also investigates how flow experience is related to replay intention. Furthermore, this is the first study to explore the relationship between perceived uncertainty and challenges in online gaming.

The proposed research model was empirically evaluated using survey data collected from online game players. The evaluation was conducted using partial least squares of structural equation modeling.

The findings revealed that flow experience was a significant predictor of replay intention. Four antecedents of flow (telepresence, focused attention, skills, and challenges) had a positive influence on flow experience. Interactivity (human-to-human interactivity and human-to-machine interactivity) and personal beliefs (perceived attractiveness, personal involvement, and perceived uncertainty) influenced these antecedents. Moreover, human-to-human interactivity exerted a greater impact on the flow experience antecedents than did human-to-machine-associated interactivity. This study reveals that human-to-human interactivity is most crucial to the effective development of online games. In addition, the author find that utilitarian motivations have positive moderating effects on the relationship between flow and replay intention. Finally, additional practical and managerial implications are discussed.

Few empirical studies have explored the moderating role of utilitarian motivations. This original study analyzed how utilitarian motivations moderate the relationships between flow and replay intention of online game players. Moreover, this is one of the first studies to explore the characteristic of uncertainty and its role in the context of online game playing.