CONSTRUAL BIASES IN THE MEDIATION OF CONFLICT

建议进行14项研究，以探索不同的 认知、知觉动机和社会过程在其中发挥作用 制造和持久的社会冲突，并在挫败争端 决议。一组研究源于对“幼稚”的分析 现实主义“(即未能区分客观和 主观现实，以及相关的未能做出充分推理的问题 允许人们对相同概念的不同理解 客观刺激)来推导和考虑两个相关的现象： 高估极端和意识形态一致性的倾向 党派，以及在共和党的努力中看到敌意偏见的倾向 调解人和其他“第三方”。第二组研究集中在 关于党派“反应性”贬低妥协价值的倾向 “另一方”提供的让步(即减少的趋势 喜欢已明确表示的妥协或让步 提供，相对于替代妥协或让步 未被提供)。第三组研究将我们的关注点扩展到 其他三个争端解决障碍；即追求公平， 为了获得收益而不愿承担损失，以及 由于以前的谈判失败而产生的不和谐。 在这些研究中遵循的研究策略一般涉及三个方面 相关阶段或组成部分：第一，演示现象和 探索参数；第二，调查潜在的过程；以及 第三，检验我们的各种“干预”的成功程度 概念分析(和现实世界的经验)让我们相信 可能会削弱引起冲突或使冲突永久化的 有问题的现象。这些研究涉及到经典的理论问题。 关于认知、知觉和动机的相互作用 过程，例如，同化与对比、不和谐与 电抗、解释的变化与偏好的变化或 优先--影响人类的判断和决策。在 同时，他们承诺为那些寻求 了解和改善敌意的状态和螺旋式上升 和不信任，这威胁到个人的心理健康，并危及 个人、团体、甚至国家之间的关系。

Fourteen studies are proposed exploring that role that various cognitive, perceptual motivational, and social processes play in creating and perpetuating social conflict, and in thwarting dispute resolution. One group of studies proceeds from an analysis of "naive realism" (i.e., the failure to distinguish between objective and subjective reality, and the related failure to make adequate inferential allowance for differences in people's interpretations of identical objective stimuli) to derive and consider two related phenomena: the tendency to overestimate the extremity and ideological consistency of partisans, and the tendency to see hostile bias in the efforts of mediators and other "third-parties." A second group of studies focuses on the tendency for partisans to "reactively" devalue compromises and concessions offered by the "otherside" (i.e., the tendency to decrease one's liking for compromises or concessions that have been explicitly offered, relative to alternative compromises or concessions that have not been offered). A third group of studies expands our concerns to three other dispute resolution barriers; i.e., the pursuit of equity, the unwillingness to bear losses in order to achieve gains, and the dissonance engendered by previous negotiation failures. The research strategy followed in these studies generally involves three related stages or components: first, demonstrating phenomena and exploring parameters; second, investigating underlying processes; and third, testing the success of various "interventions" that our conceptual analyses (and real-world experiences) lead us to believe might attenuate the conflict-producing or conflict-perpetuating phenomena in question. These studies speak to classic theoretical issues concerning the interplay of cognitive, perceptual, and motivational processes e.g., assimilation versus contrast, dissonance versus reactance, shifts in interpretation versus shifts in preference or priority -- in influencing human judgement and decision-making. At the same time, they promise significant dividends for practitioners who seek to understand and ameliorate the statemates, and spirals of hostility and distrust, that threaten individual mental health and jeopardize relationships among individuals, groups, and even nations.