The Mediation Window: Regulation of Argumentation and Affect in Custody Mediation

REFERENCES

• Amato, P. R. (2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 650–666. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballard, R. H., Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Applegate, A. G., & D’Onofrio, B. (2011). Factors affecting the outcome of divorce and paternity mediations. Family Court Review, 49, 16–33.
   Google Scholar
• Berman, D., & Alfini, J. (2012). Lawyer colonization of family mediation: Consequences and implications. Marquette Law Review, 95, 887–925.
   Google Scholar
• Bryan, P. E. (1992). Killing us softly: Divorce mediation and the politics of power. Buffalo Law Review, 40, 441–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush, R. A. B., & Folger, J. P. (2005). The promise of mediation. The transformative approach to conflict. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, O. (2009). Listening to clients: Facilitating factors, difficulties, impediments, and turning points in divorce mediation. Family Therapy, 36, 63–82.
   Google Scholar
• Coogler, O. J., Weber, R. E., & McKenry, P. C. (1979). Divorce mediation: A means of facilitating divorce and adjustment. The Family Coordinator, 28, 255–259.
   Google Scholar
• Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage, Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3–65). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elrod, D. L., & Dale, M. D. (2009). Paradigm shifts and pendulum swings in child custody: The interests of the children in the balance. Family Law Quarterly, 42, 381–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emery, R. E. (2012). Renegotiating family relationships (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Emery, R., Sbarra, D., & Grover, T. (2005). Divorce mediation: Research and reflections. Family Court Review, 43, 22–37.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrara, K. W. (1994). Therapeutic ways with words. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fincham, F. D. (2003). Marital conflict: Correlates, structure, and context. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 23–27. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.01215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folger, J. (2008). Harmony and transformative mediation practice: Sustaining ideological differences in purpose and practice. North Dakota Law Review, 84, 823–860.
   Google Scholar
• Gee, J. P. (2011). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gerami, A. (2009). Bridging the theory-and-practice gap: Mediator power in practice. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 26, 433–451.
   Google Scholar
• Girdner, L. K. (1987). Custody mediation in the United States: Empowerment or social control? Canadian Journal of Women and Law, 3, 134–153.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Goodmark, L. (2000). Alternative dispute resolution and the potential for gender bias. Judges’ Journal, 39, 21–47.
   Google Scholar
• Gulbrandsen, W. (2013). Foreldrekonflikter etter samlivsbrudd: En analyse av samspill og kilder til det fastlåsende. [Parents in mediation: Patterns of communication and sources to conflicts.] Tidsskrift for norsk psykologforening, 50, 538–551.
   Google Scholar
• Gulbrandsen, W., & Tjersland, O. A. (2013). Hvordan virker obligatorisk foreldremekling ved store konflikter? [How does mandatory custody mediation work in high-conflict cases?] Tidsskrift for Velferdsforskning, 16, 17–30.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation analysis. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, T. S., & Bodtker, A. (2001). Mediation with heart in mind: Addressing emotion in mediation practice. Negotiation Journal, 17, 217–244. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2001.tb00238.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, J. B. (2004). Family mediation research: Is there empirical support for the field? Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 22, 3–35.
   Google Scholar
• Lindner, E. G. (2006). Emotion and conflict: Why it is important to understand how emotions affect conflict and how conflict affects emotion. In M. Deutsch, P. T. Coleman, & E. Marcus ( Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 268–293). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• McLeod, J., & Elliott, R. (2011). Systematic case study research: A practice-oriented introduction to building an evidence base for counselling and psychotherapy. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 11, 1–10. doi:10.1080/14733145.2011.548954
   Google Scholar
• Norcross, J. C., & Lambert, M. J. (2011). Evidence-based therapy relationships. In J. C. Norcross ( Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Evidence-based responsiveness (2nd ed., pp. 3–21). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, J., & Quirk, K. (2014). Heightening in couple therapy. Psychotherapy, 51, 7–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson, J., & Thoennes, N. (1984). Mediating and litigating custody disputes: A longitudinal evaluation. Family Law Quarterly, 17, 497–524.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peräkylä, A., Antaki, C., Vehviläinen, S., & Leudar, I. (2008). Analysing psychotherapy in practice. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar ( Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 5–25). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Perry, S. J., Marcum, T. M., & Stoner, C. R. (2011). Stumbling down the courthouse steps: Mediators’ perceptions of the stumbling blocks to successful mandated mediation in child custody and visitation. Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, 11, 441–465.
   Google Scholar
• Pittenger, R. E., Hockett, C. F., & Danehy, J. J. (1960). The first five minutes: A sample of microscopic interview analysis. New York, NY: Paul Martineau.
   Google Scholar
• Poitras, J. (2013). The strategic use of caucus to facilitate parties’ trust in mediators. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24, 23–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poitras, J., & Raines, S. (2013). Expert mediators. New York, NY: Aronson.
   Google Scholar
• Press, S. (2013). Family court services: A reflection on 50 years of contributions. Family Court Review, 51, 48–55. doi:10.1111/fcre.12007
   Google Scholar
• Rivera, E. A., Zeoli, A. M., & Sullivan, C. M. (2012). Abused mothers’ safety concerns and court mediators’ custody recommendations. Journal of Family Violence, 27, 321–332. doi:10.1007/s10896-012-9426-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salem, P., Kulak, D., & Deutsch, R. M. (2007). Triaging family court services: The Connecticut judicial branch’s family civil intake screen. Pace Law Review, 27, 741–783.
   Google Scholar
• Saposnek, D. T. (2006). The dynamics of power in child custody mediation. In M. S. Herrman ( Ed.), The Blackwell handbook of mediation: Bridging theory, research, and practice (pp. 260–276). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro, D. L. (2002). Negotiating emotions. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 20, 67–82. doi:10.1002/crq.11
   Google Scholar
• Sinaceur, M., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Get mad and get more than even: When and why anger expression is effective in negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 314–322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. London, UK: Sage.
   Google Scholar