Every dispute is a story, and every story must be told. In the Tuesday, May 22, 2007 Science Times section of the New York Times, Benedict Carey discusses research on how and why each of us have the personalities and traits that we do have and that we do not have. In his article, “This is Your Life (and How You Tell It)”, Mr. Carey focuses on how researchers are now only beginning to focus on the “first person explanation – the life story that people themselves tell about who they are and why.” (Id.) The personal narrative is beginning to gain credence in explaining why people behave as they do and how they view themselves not only in the past but also in the future:

Researchers have found that the human brain has a natural affinity for narrative construction. People tend to remember facts more accurately if they encounter them in a story rather than in a list, . . . and they rate legal arguments as more convincing when built into narrative tales rather than on legal precedent.

 What researchers have discovered is that it is also important in how each person tells her story – in the first person or third person. Those that tell their story of past events in the third person allow distance to be put between themselves and the events. More significantly, third party narratives allow the storyteller to focus on the events and why the storyteller felt the way she did about the events. Thus, while the emotional content of the memory is still felt, its sting is blunted by the distancing. Such distancing also gives the storyteller more freedom or permission to change her behavior for the future. That is, “projecting future actions in the third person may also affect what people later do. . . .” (Id.)

 In sum, “seeing oneself as acting in a movie or a play is not merely fantasy or indulgence: it is fundamental to how people work out who it is they are and how they may become.” (Id.)

 What does this has to do with mediation: quite a lot. By allowing the parties to tell their stories, the mediator allows them to work things out in their mind. By encouraging them to tell the story in the third person, the mediator permits them to remove themselves as a participant in the dispute and become a witness. As a witness, they can then focus more objectively on the events, why they acted as they did and give themselves permission to change their ways. The parties can permit themselves a means to resolve the dispute and to create a plan of action by which to move forward.

 In sum, wittingly or unwittingly, the parties have engaged in a process known as narrative mediation. As explained on the Conflict Resolution Information Source website, narrative mediation focuses on the parties’ stories rather than on the traditional problem-solving, interest based model of resolving disputes. “A narrative mediation approach encourages the conflicting parties to reach understanding and resolution through a deep understanding of the shared personal and cultural narratives underlying the conflict.” (Id.) Focusing on the story that each person has to tell, narrative mediation seeks to resolve the conflict by having each party externalize their story (i.e. use a third person narrative) and then focus on how they would like their story to end. That is, creating an alternative story or re-telling the story in a different way to produce a positive outcome. In very literal terms, the person is separated from the problem and the problem is the problem.
 
 Narrative mediation emerged and developed from narrative therapy by Michael White and David Epston and it has been used for many years with success. Thus, it is not surprising that the research referenced in the New York Times article is meeting with success. Every person does, indeed, live her life through a story that must be told.   

This entry was posted on Friday, May 25th, 2007 at 6:23 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.