Argumentation 31 (1):45-82 (2017)

Mediation is an alternative dispute resolution process that is becoming more and more popular particularly in English-speaking countries. In contrast to traditional litigation it has not benefited from technological advances and little research has been carried out to make this increasingly widespread practice more efficient. The study of argumentation in dispute mediation hitherto has largely been concerned with theoretical insights. The development of argumentation theories linked to computational applications opens promising new horizons since computational tools could support mediators, making sessions quicker and more efficient. For this, we need tools for close analysis of mediation discourse in order to explore the argumentative activity in depth, and ultimately get an accurate image of how dialogues unfold in this particular context. This paper therefore aims at laying the foundations of a theory of close analysis for discourse in dispute mediation. Theories provided by the literature serve as a basis for argumentative analyses of transcripts of mediation sessions in order to deliver a clear image of the argumentative structure. Analyses of the argumentative strategies in mediation discourse will allow for the development of a dialogue protocol that can be used to develop operational models which can be embodied in software to help make the mediation process easier and more effective.
Keywords Argument analysis  Mediation  Discourse  Inference Anchoring Theory
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10503-015-9386-y
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 53,645
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Coalescent Argumentation.Michael A. Gilbert - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (5):837-852.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Divide to Unite.Emma van Bijnen & Sara Greco - 2018 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 7 (3):285-315.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Some Ethical Problems in Mediated Dispute Resolution.Kevin William Gibson - 1991 - Dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder
Mandatory Mediation: Opportunities and Challenges.Natalija Kaminskienė - 2013 - Jurisprudencija: Mokslo darbu žurnalas 20 (2):683-706.
Semiotics of Mediation. Theses.Peeter Torop - 2012 - Sign Systems Studies 40 (3/4):547-555.
The Problem of Legitimacy in Mediation.Jonathan Crowe & Rachael Field - 2008 - Contemporary Issues in Law 9:48-60.
Mediation as an Ethical Adjunct of Stakeholder Theory.Marc Lampe - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 31 (2):165 - 173.
Postmodernism Meets the Balkan Crises: Affirming, Celebrating, and Prioritizing Difference and Sameness In Mediation Efforts.Dragan Milovanovic - 2001 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 14 (4):409-428.


Added to PP index

Total views
23 ( #433,881 of 2,349,140 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #331,146 of 2,349,140 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes