Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Reframing: Additional Resources
These references supplement the Knowledge Base Essay, Reframing.
|
Additional Explanations of the Underlying Concepts:
Online (Web) Sources
"I" Statements Not "You" Statements. Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/treatment/istate.htm [Backup Link] Simply changing the way in which complaints are phrased can limit escalation pressures. For example accusatory phrases, "you did this," are often more likely to contribute to escalation than less accusatory phrases such as "I am having trouble because of this." "Joint Reframing/Assisted Reframing." , Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/treatment/jtrefram.htm [Backup Link] This page presents a nice summary of the concept of joint or assisted reframing and includes suggestions for further reading on the topic. Blanciak, Peter. "Reframing: The Essence of Mediation." , August 2002 Available at: http://www.mediate.com/articles/blanciak.cfm [Backup Link] This article explains why, and how mediators reframe conflicts. It also lists a number of techniques that a mediator can use to achieve this aim.
Offline (Print) Sources
Ury, William L. "Change the Game: Don't Reject...Reframe." In Getting Past No: Negotiating With Difficult People. New York: Bantam Books, January 1, 1993. Pages: 59-85. This chapter provides advice to people involved in dispute and/or conflict resolution practitioners, on how to go about reframing issues and statements that arise in the course of a negotiation. Ury describes various questions one may ask as well as tactics for effectively reframing contentious points, so that parties have a better chance at reaching agreement. Primary Link Schon, Donald A. and Martin Rein. Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. New York: Basic Books, 1994. This work focuses on the problem of intractable policy controversies. The work concentrates on the importance of frames and the notion that parties to policy controversies see issues, policies, and policy situations in different and conflicting ways that correspond to certain systems of belief and consequent modes of action. The authors outline a theoretical framework for thinking about these issues and employ multiple case studies to illustrate their innovative approach to solving policy disputes. The approach emphasizes the practice of reframing issues as a way toward resolution. Primary Link Mayer, Bernard. "Framing a Conflict for Resolution." In The Dynamics of Conflict Resolution: A Practitioner's Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2000. Pages: 132-139. This section defines the process of "successive reframing" and outlines a series of principles for effective reframing as well as describing four different levels on which issues may be reframed -- detoxification, definitional, metaphoric, and shifting the conflict paradigm. The section includes clear examples of reframed statements for each level discussed. Primary Link Putnam, Linda L. and M. Holmer. "Framing, Reframing and Issue Development." In Communication and Negotiation. Edited by Putnam, Linda L. and M. Holmer, eds. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1992. This chapter offers a review and critique of the theoretical approaches that researchers have employed in studying framing in negotiation. The review offers good background information on the concept of framing and the research that has been conducted on it. After reviewing previous literature on the subject, the authors introduce two alternative models of framing and reframing. Bodtker, Andrea M. and Jessica K. Jameson. "Mediation as Mutual Influence: Reexamining the Use of Framing and Reframing." Mediation Quarterly 14:3, 1997. This article presents an alternative perspective on the practice of mediation, arguing that previous conceptions of the process place too little emphasis on the role of the disputants in process. The authors believe the degree to which mediators guide the process, especially the framing and reframing of issues, has been overemphasized. This article argues, instead, that disputants play a more influential role in the framing of issues and the overall mediation process than previously acknowledged. Basically, this article proposes a more robust model of the mediation process, emphasizing the mutual influence of all parties involved. "Power and Social Exchange." American Political Science Review 72, 1978. This article provides theoretical grounding for helping third parties or antagonists reframe conflictual environments. Rothman, Jay. Resolving Identity-Based Conflict in Nations, Organizations, and Communities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, June 1997. This work explicates the ARIA (Antagonism-Resonance-Invention-Action) Framework, which Rothman proposes as an effective process for resolving identity-based conflicts. Conflicts are normally framed in adversarial terms at first, focusing on the "what" of the conflict or the resources at stake. This stage creates antagonism. The stage of reflexive reframing focuses on the "why" and "who" of the conflict, especially the identity needs of the parties involved. Reframing represents a critical juncture in the resolution process and fosters resonance among the parties. Once the parties frame the conflict in similar terms, cooperation is more likely and the stage is set for inventing integrative solutions. Agenda setting is the final step toward taking cooperative action. Primary Link [Backup Link]
Examples Illustrating this Topic:
Online (Web) Sources
Kaufman, Sanda and Janet Smith. "Framing and Reframing in Land Use Change Conflicts." Journal of Architectural & Planning Research: Special issue Managing Conflict in Planning and Design , 1998 Available at: http://urban.csuohio.edu/~sanda/papers/frames98.htm [Backup Link] Proposed changes to community land use frequently give rise to protracted disputes. Cognitive psychology, communication, and decision-making research suggests that frames, which filter people's perception of a problem, can affect conflict processes and outcomes. This paper argues that frames may significantly influence public participation in decisions to change a community's physical space.
Offline (Print) Sources
Moore, Christopher W. "Defining Issues and Setting an Agenda." In The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict, 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996. Pages: 213-230. This chapter discusses some of the steps that mediators must carry out in order to move disputants from a competitive to cooperative orientation. One of the key steps in this process is that of identifying issues to be dealt with, and framing and/or reframing them in a way that will allow the parties to move forward toward resolution. A significant portion of this chapter focuses on the concepts framing and reframing and incorporates examples of the method throughout. Primary Link [Backup Link] Burgess, Guy M., Sanda Kaufman and Robert Gardner. "Just the Facts, Please: Framing and Technical Information." In Environmental Practice. Edited by Gray, Barbara, Roy J. Lewicki and Michael Elliott, eds. Oxford, OH: Oxford University Press, September 2003. In this article, the authors introduce the concept of framing theory in the context of environmental disputes. They examine the various ways that individuals and stakeholders in environmental policy disputes interpret, relate to, and understand technical and scientific facts. They offer solutions to reframe common relationships to highly technical information in ways that allow greater communication between parties to environmental conflicts. Making Sense of Intractable Environmental Conflicts: Frames and Cases. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2003. This edited volume consists of a series of case studies that examine processes used to help resolve environmental conflicts. The work opens with an introductory chapter on how environmental conflicts are framed as well as a discussion of the meaning of the term intractability. The case studies cover natural resource cases, water cases, toxics cases, and growth management cases. The concept and importance of framing are emphasized throughout all of the pieces in the work. Susskind, Lawrence and Patrick Field. "The Mutual-Gains Approach." In Dealing With An Angry Public: The Mutual Gains Approach To Resolving Disputes. New York: Free Press, January 1, 1996. Pages: 37-59. The authors' mutual gains approach to dealing with an angry public is essentially a reframing approach, which transforms conflicts from an "us against them" or "we against you" to a "lets solve this together" situation. This chapter employs several case examples to illustrate the principles of the mutual-gains approach. Primary Link [Backup Link] |
