Mediator Listening,Dispute Reframing,and Mediation Outcome: A Pilot Study

This study examined the impact of mediator listening style on reframing, mediation outcome, and parties' perceptions of mediator performance. Trained mediators from the Alternative Dispute Resolution program at James Madison University served as third-party neutrals for thirty-two mediation sessions. Three experimental conditions tested critical listening, discriminative listening, and empathic listening. Significant differences were found among the listening conditions for reframing and mediation outcomes. Results suggest that mediators using empathic listening facilitate more conflict resolution and dispute settlement than mediators not using empathic listening. Analyses were done examining the subsequent effects of mediator listening style and reframing on parties' perceptions of mediator performance. Factor analysis and analysis of variance tests indicate disputants perceive empathic mediators as more fair and more objective than nonempathic mediators.