Article Summary of "Reflexive Dialogue as
Transformation" by Jay Rothman
Citation: Jay Rothman. "Reflexive Dialogue as Transformation." Mediation Quarterly 13:4 (Summer 1996) pp. 345-52.
This Article Summary written by: Tanya Glaser, Conflict Research Consortium
Rothman describes his approach to intervention in identity
conflicts as facilitating reflexive dialogue. He sees reflexive
dialogue as a form of transformative conflict resolution.
Reflexive dialogue is "a form of guided and interactive
introspection by which disputants speak about themselves in the
presence of their adversaries, and about their needs and
interests viewed interactively through the prism of the conflict
situation."[p. 347] Exploration and clarification of the
disputants' own needs and interests is empowering. Pursuing this
introspection through interaction with the opponent fosters
recognition.
As with the transformative approach, reflexive dialogue
de-emphasizes the goal of settlement or problem-solving. Rothman
says, "The goal of reflexive dialogue is to help disputants
and third parties identify identity conflicts and engage
proactively in a creative conflict management process at the
midpoint between these extremes [of avoidance or
escalation]"[p. 345]
Identity conflicts in particular are highly subjective. These
conflicts are not based primarily on objective facts or
historical events. Rather, identity conflicts are based in the
disputants' feelings, interpretations, and in the meanings they
ascribe to various events. Through facilitated reflexive
dialogue, Rothman first seeks to clarify the subjective core, or
inner meaning, of the conflict for both sides in the dispute. He
then seeks to bridge the disputants' separate subjective
realities by helping them to develop a shared, intersubjective
reality. Such shared realities may then serve as bases for
cooperation.
In reflexive introspection, parties "inquire foremost
into what the conflict 'out there' means to them 'inside,' and
how their own internal processes and priorities have negatively
shaped and can be channeled to positively reshape the course of
that exogenous conflict."[p. 347-8] Rather than merely react
to the opponent, parties learn to examine their own reactions,
seeking to better understand their sources.
When successful, reflexive dialogue leads disputants from
blame to recognition of mutual responsibility. Disputants may
move from an "us versus them" mentality to an
appreciation of how "we" together have and continue to
shape the course of the conflict. Rothman describes the
development of a type of analytical empathy, "in which the
other is viewed as 'like self' with respect to motivations, needs
and values."[p. 352] Finally, parties become more aware of
their own failures and imperfections, and hence less
self-righteous and more tolerant of the opponents' faults.
|