232
most part, culturally homogenous, it is expected a similar study on a larger
and more diverse sample of mediators would
define other traits to yield
different and more complex patterns of mediation meanings.
Question 3: Is there a correlation between how mediators understand
mediation and the types of disputes they mediate?
It would be interesting to know if the different meanings given to mediation
are linked to types of disputes rather than to sector? One might ask, what is
the variance in understandings of mediation by
those who primarily mediate
disputes that involve issues of harassment, child custody, finances,
health
care, or overtime, to name only a few? This question stems from finding that
individuals who worked within the same sector do not understand mediation
the same way. Given that most of the sample work
in more than one dispute
sector may account for some of this plurality of understanding. Then again,
other factors may be contributing to this finding. Does a highly relational-type
dispute (for example, a child custody dispute) have more of one particular set
of interacting traits than a highly technical-type dispute (for example, the
division of property). Building upon this question
- what do different types of
disputes reveal about the language used by a mediator? Is there a common
understanding of mediation concepts within dispute-type?