The Usage of Mediation in Interpersonal Bias Mitigation

Abstract

Oftentimes, biases, whether conscious or unconscious, may be easily identifiable from language choices; however, the most effective approach to address such mindsets is more ambiguous. Small tonal inflections, negative body language, and accusatory language choices are commonplace approaches to addressing bias which can result in defensive behavior, ultimately preventing people from processing new information, a function that is imperative in reduction of bias. Such approaches may also anger those who express biased viewpoints, thus, causing an increase in heart rate (Kreibig, 2010). This increase shifts decision making from the frontal lobe, involved with morality and rational thought, to the limbic system which is involved with emotional thinking and impulsivity. Additionally, past studies have linked such physiological changes to a reduced capacity to adequately reason and evaluate societal problems (Grossman et. al., 2016).
 Although mediation is a strategy used in the legal field to facilitate conversations, this procedure may be applied to other fields, whereby the strategic process may prevent escalation and reduce biases. The techniques that mediators use in facilitating conversations could be key to addressing bias in interpersonal interactions. Alternatively, though the accusatory approach is most commonly used in addressing bias, the efficacy of such an approach is questionable. 
 This study aimed to test the effects of these two approaches by presenting subjects with both in a controlled setting and attempting to see whether or not mediation should have a role in addressing biases and reducing prejudice. Results indicated that mediation was more successful in minimizing increases in heart-rate.