Skip to main content
Scholarly Papers
Dec 9, 2019

Embracing Debiasing in Mediator’s Tactic of Reality Testing

Publication: Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 12, Issue 1

Abstract

Biased decisions hinder rational construction dispute negotiations. Successful use of debiasing strategies enhances the efficiency of construction dispute management. Due to the flexibility and popularity of mediation, it is proposed that debiasing arrangements be incorporated into the mediator’s toolkit. Reality testing has been commonly used by mediators to keep disputing parties on rational courses. As such, integrating debiasing in reality testing is proposed as well. For example, a mediator can tactfully ask well-thought-out questions to stimulate the disputing parties to review and reestimate their decisions. This provides an opportunity for the parties to acknowledge their unrealistic beliefs and expectations. Seventeen reality-testing questions embracing debiasing elements are proposed. By asking these questions, mediators remind the disputants to (1) allow adequate time in decision making; (2) consider the opposite; (3) be rational; and (4) optimize the mediation mechanism. The usefulness of these reality-testing questions has been as validated by experienced third-party neutrals with substantial credentials.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Acknowledgments

The work reported in this paper was fully supported by the HKSAR General Research Fund (Project No. 11209118).

References

Works Cited

Allen, E. 1957. The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research. New York: Dryden Press.
Arkes, H. R. 1991. “Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing.” Psychol. Bull. 110 (3): 486. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.486.
Ashton, R. H., and J. Kennedy. 2002. “Eliminating recency with self-review: The case of auditors’ ‘going concern’ judgments.” J. Behav. Decis. Making 15 (3): 221–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.412.
Bazerman, M. H., J. R. Curhan, D. A. Moore, and K. L. Valley. 2000. “Negotiation.” Ann. Rev. Psychol. 51 (1): 279–314. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.279.
Bazerman, M. H., and M. A. Neale. 1993. Negotiating rationally. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Bentz, B. G., D. A. Williamson, and S. F. Franks. 2004. “Debiasing of pessimistic judgments associated with anxiety.” J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 26 (3): 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOBA.0000022109.68806.01.
Bergman, O., T. Ellingsen, M. Johannesson, and C. Svensson. 2010. “Anchoring and cognitive ability.” Econ. Lett. 107 (1): 66–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2009.12.028.
Brandon, M., and L. Robertson. 2007. Conflict and dispute resolution: A guide for practice. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Brooker, P., and S. Wilkinson., ed. 2010. Mediation in the construction industry: An international review. London: Routledge.
Burke, A. 2007. “Neutralizing cognitive bias: An invitation to prosecutors.” NYUJL Liberty 2: 512–530.
Chapman, G. B., and E. J. Johnson. 1999. “Anchoring, activation, and the construction of values.” Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 79 (2): 115–153. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1999.2841.
Charlton, R. 2000. Dispute resolution guidebook. Sydney: LBC Information Services.
Cheung, S. O. 2010. “Construction mediation landscape in the civil justice system in Hong Kong.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2 (3): 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000022.
Cheung, S. O. 2014. “The effective use of ADR processes in construction.” In Construction dispute research, 299–317. New York: Springer.
Cheung, S. O., and K. Li. 2019. “Biases in construction project dispute resolution.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 26 (2): 321–348. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-03-2018-0109.
Croskerry, P., G. Singhal, and S. Mamede. 2013. “Cognitive debiasing 2: Impediments to and strategies for change.” Supplement, BMJ Qual. Saf. 22 (S2): ii65–ii72. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001713.
Dick, A., and T. Ballantine. 2001. The art of family law: Skills for successful practice. Edinburgh: W. Green/Sweet & Maxwell.
Drolet, A. L., and M. W. Morris. 2000. “Rapport in conflict resolution: Accounting for how face-to-face contact fosters mutual cooperation in mixed-motive conflicts.” J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 36 (1): 26–50. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1999.1395.
Fisher, R., W. L. Ury, and B. Patton. 2011. Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. London: Penguin.
Forgas, J. P. 1995. “Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM).” Psychol. Bull. 117 (1): 39. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.39.
Galinsky, A. D., and G. Ku. 2004. “The effects of perspective-taking on prejudice: The moderating role of self-evaluation.” Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 30 (5): 594–604. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203262802.
Galinsky, A. D., and G. B. Moskowitz. 2000. “Perspective-taking: Decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism.” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78 (4): 708–724. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.708.
Galinsky, A. D., and T. Mussweiler. 2001. “First offers as anchors: The role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus.” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 81 (4): 657. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.4.657.
Goldberg, S. B., F. E. Sander, N. H. Rogers, and S. R. Cole. 2014. Dispute resolution: Negotiation, mediation and other processes. Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Hammond, J. S., R. L. Keeney, and H. Raiffa. 1998. “The hidden traps in decision making.” Harvard Bus. Rev. 76 (5): 47–58.
Hastie, R. 2001. “Problems for judgment and decision making.” Ann. Rev. Psychol. 52 (1): 653–683. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.653.
Holaday, L. C. 2002. “Stage development theory: A natural framework for understanding the mediation process.” Negotiation J. 18 (3): 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2002.tb00740.x.
Jones, T. S., and A. Bodtker. 2001. “Mediating with heart in mind: Addressing emotion in mediation practice.” Negotiation J. 17 (3): 207–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2001.tb00238.x.
Karim, A., and R. Pegnetter. 1983. “Mediator strategies and qualities and mediation effectiveness.” Ind. Relat. 22 (1): 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-232X.1983.tb00257.x.
Kelly, J. B. 1983. “Mediation and psychotherapy: Distinguishing the differences.” Mediation Q. 1: 33. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.39019830105.
Lande, J. 2002. “Using dispute system design methods to promote good-faith participation in court-connected mediation programs.” UCLA L. Rev. 50 (1): 69–141. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.358420.
Larrick, R. P. 2004. “Debiasing.” In Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making, edited by D. J. Koehler and N. Harvey, 316–338. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing.
Leung, H. M. 2014. Hong Kong mediation handbook. 2nd ed. Hong Kong: Sweet and Maxwell.
Li, K., and S. O. Cheung. 2016. “The potential of bias in multi-tier construction dispute resolution processes.” In Vol. 1 of Proc., 32nd Annual ARCOM Conf., edited by P. W. Chan and C. J. Neilson, 197–205. Edinburgh, UK: Association of Researchers in Construction Management.
Li, K., and S. O. Cheung. 2018. “Bias measurement scale for repeated dispute evaluations.” J. Manage. Eng. 34 (4): 04018016. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000617.
Li, K., and S. O. Cheung. 2019. “Unveiling cognitive biases in construction project dispute resolution through the lenses of third-party neutrals.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 145 (11): 04019070. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001707.
Lord, C. G., M. R. Lepper, and E. Preston. 1984. “Considering the opposite: A corrective strategy for social judgment.” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 47 (6): 1231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1231.
McCorkle, S., and M. J. Reese. 2015. Mediation theory and practice. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
McLaughlin, M. E., P. Carnevale, and R. G. Lim. 1991. “Professional mediators’ judgments of mediation tactics: Multidimensional scaling and cluster analyses.” J. Appl. Psychol. 76 (3): 465. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.3.465.
Mediation Ordinance. 2013. Laws of Hong Kong CAP 620. Hong Kong: Hong Kong e-Legislation.
Menkel-Meadow, C., and L. Porter-Love. 2014. Mediation: Practice, policy, and ethics. Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Ministry of Justice. 2009. “Practice direction 6.1: Construction and arbitration list.” Accessed February 8, 2009. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06/pd_part06a.
Mussweiler, T., F. Strack, and T. Pfeiffer. 2000. “Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility.” Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26 (9): 1142–1150. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672002611010.
Posthuma, R. A., J. B. Dworkin, and M. S. Swift. 2002. “Mediator tactics and sources of conflict: Facilitating and inhibiting effects.” Ind. Relat. J. Econ. Soc. 41 (1): 94–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-232X.00237.
Qu, Y., and S. O. Cheung. 2013. “Experimental evaluation of logrolling as an effective mediating tactic in construction project management.” Int. J. Project Manage. 31 (5): 775–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.05.003.
Richbell, D. 2007. Mediation of construction disputes. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing.
Sanna, L. J., and N. Schwarz. 2004. “Integrating temporal biases.” Psychol. Sci. 15 (7): 474–481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00704.x.
Sedikides, C., W. K. Campbell, G. D. Reeder, and A. J. Elliot. 1998. “The self-serving bias in relational context.” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74 (2): 378. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.378.
Soll, J., K. Milkman, and J. Payne. 2014. A user’s guide to debiasing. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Tembo, C., I. Ndekugri, and F. Hammond. 2010. “Practice and procedure in the mediation of construction industry disputes: An exploratory study.” In Proc., W113-Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress, 203–214. Dresden, Germany: Institute of Construction Informatics.
Thompson, L., J. Nadler, and R. B. Lount, Jr. 2006. “Judgmental biases in conflict resolution and how to overcome them.” In The handbook on conflict resolution: Theory and practice, 213–235. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Williams, B. J. 2017. “Accountability as a debiasing strategy: Testing the effect of racial diversity in employment committees.” Iowa Law Rev. 103: 1593–1638.
Yiu, T. W., S. O. Cheung, and C. H. Cheung. 2007. “Toward a typology of construction mediator tactics.” Build. Environ. 42 (6): 2344–2359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.05.005.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 12Issue 1February 2020

History

Received: Apr 22, 2019
Accepted: Jul 1, 2019
Published online: Dec 9, 2019
Published in print: Feb 1, 2020
Discussion open until: May 9, 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Construction Dispute Resolution Research Unit, Dept. of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City Univ. of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6220-7459. Email: [email protected]
Sai On Cheung, M.ASCE [email protected]
Professor, Construction Dispute Resolution Research Unit, Dept. of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City Univ. of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share