Implicit Bias and the Illusion of Mediator Neutrality
Implicit Bias and the Illusion of Mediator Neutrality
复制标题
隐性偏见和调解者中立的幻觉
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Carol L. Izumi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carol L. Izumi
原告（P）是一家地毯清洁企业的所有者/经营者，他起诉业主违反合同，要求赔偿1,000美元地毯清洁协议的未付余额500美元。被告（D或D先生和D夫人）反诉要求退还他们在开工前支付的500美元存款。ds雇佣原告在他们的地下室里晾干和清洗在暴风雨中被洪水淹没的浸湿的地毯。D拒绝支付余额，因为地毯没有像P承诺的那样变干。根据小额索赔法院调解计划，双方必须在审判日期确定之前尝试调解。P是一名中年白色男性，穿着工作服参加调解。D是一对同样成熟的亚裔夫妇，他们说话带有明显的口音。他们穿着可以称之为"商务休闲"的服装。调解是由两名白色共同调解人围绕一张大会议桌进行的，一名40多岁的男性和一名年轻女性。调解员进行了"核心小组模式"的协助式调解。P将此案视为一个简单的违约行为：当事人之间的协议要求房主支付两笔500美元的款项，而第二笔款项尚未支付。D先生抱怨说，企业主试图欺骗他，向他收取不满意的工作费用。在调解过程中，P先生和D先生的行为举止截然不同。P是一个实事求是、脾气平和的人。D先生又生气又激动。在调解过程中，D夫人安静地坐在丈夫的后面和右边。她说了一句，很快就被她丈夫嘘了。在联席会议上，P描述了商业交易和他在地下室放置大风扇以干燥地毯的行为。他说，他向房主强调了保持楼上通往地下室的门敞开以使空气流通的重要性。地毯没有像他预期的那样干，因为DS没有按照指示保持门开着。当他第二天去那所房子时，他发现门关着。调解员问了P一些关于合同的问题，他与Ds的互动，
Plaintiff (P), the owner/operator of a carpet cleaning business, sued the defendant-homeowners for $500 in a breach of contract action for the unpaid balance of a $1,000 carpet cleaning agreement. Defendants (Ds or Mr. and Mrs. D) counterclaimed for the return of the $500 deposit they paid before work began. Ds hired plaintiff to dry out and clean the soaked carpet in their basement that flooded during a storm. Ds refused to pay the balance because the carpet had not dried out as promised by P. Under the small claims court mediation program, the parties were required to attempt mediation before a trial date is set. P was a middle-aged white male who attended the mediation in work clothes. Ds were an equally mature married couple of Asian descent who spoke with noticeable accents. They were dressed in what might be called “business casual” attire. The mediation was conducted around a large conference table by two white co-mediators, a male who looked to be in his 40’s and a younger female. The mediators conducted a “caucus model” facilitative-style mediation. P presented the case as a simple breach of contract: the agreement between the parties required the homeowners to make two $500 payments and the second one had not been paid. Mr. D complained that the business owner was trying to cheat him, to charge him for work that was unsatisfactory. During the mediation, P and Mr. D had very different demeanors. P was matter-of-fact and even-tempered. Mr. D was angry and agitated. Mrs. D sat quietly behind and to the right of her husband during the mediation. She spoke once and was quickly shushed by her husband. In the joint session P described the business transaction and his actions placing large fans in the basement to dry out the carpet. He stated that he stressed to the homeowners the importance of keeping the upstairs door to the basement open for air to circulate. The carpet did not dry as he expected because Ds did not keep the door open as instructed. When he went to the house the following day, he found the door shut. The mediators asked P a number of questions about the contract, his interaction with Ds, and