Ir para o menu de navegação principal Ir para o conteúdo principal Ir para o rodapé

Artigos em Língua Estrangeira

v. 19 n. 119 (2018)

Identifying the game: a game-theoretical approach on the role of the mediator

DOI
https://doi.org/10.20499/2236-3645.RJP2018v19e119-1449
Enviado
30 novembro 2016
Publicado
31-01-2018

Resumo

The Game Theory is a fundamental substrate to the understanding of conflicts and to the decision-making processes preceding its resolution. Therefore, this theory becomes important for the analysis of conflict resolution methods, which are commonly used to settle various types of games observed in the daily routine. Specifically in the mediation process, the theory’s importance is even greater as it has a profound impact on the behavior of the third impartial party who conducts the practice: the mediator. It is thus interesting to investigate how the game identification may be relevant to the mediator’s choice not only of the appropriate techniques and tools, but also of the mediation’s approach itself.

Referências

  1. ALMEIDA, Tânia. Caixa de ferramentas na mediação: Aportes práticos e teóricos. São Paulo: Dash Mediação, 2015.
  2. AZEVEDO, André Gomma. Manual de Mediação Judicial. Brasília: Conselho Nacional de Justiça, 2015.
  3. BINMORE, Ken. Game Theory – A very short introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
  4. FISHER, Roger; URY, William; PATTON, Bruce. Como chegar ao sim: como negociar acordos sem fazer concessões. 1. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Salomon, 2014.
  5. HARSANYI, John C. Games with Incomplete Information Played by Bayesian Players, I-III. Management Science, University of California, vol. 14, no. 3, 1967.
  6. LEHRER, Ehud; ROSENBERG, Dinah; SHMAYA, Eran. Signaling and mediation in games with common interests. Games and Economic Behavior, no. 68, 2010, p. 670-682. Available at: http://www.math.tau.ac.il/~lehrer/Papers/signaling%20common.pdf . Accessed on: 24 Aug. 2016.
  7. LOVE, Lela P.; KOVACH, Kimberlee K. Mapping Mediation: The risks of Riskin’s Grid. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, Vol. 3, no. 71, 1998.
  8. RISKIN, Leonard L. Understanding Mediators’ Orientations, Strategies and Techniques: A Grid for the Perplexed. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, vol. 1, no. 7, 1997. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1506684 . Accessed on: 7 Nov. 2016.
  9. SALES, Lília Maia de Morais. Mediação facilitativa e “mediação” avaliativa - estabelecendo diferença e discutindo riscos. Novos Estudos Jurídicos, v. 16, n. 1, jan-abr 2011, p. 20-32. Available at: https://siaiap32.univali.br/seer/index.php/nej/article/view/3267/2049 . Accessed on: 6 Nov. 2016.
  10. SEBENIUS, James K. Negotiation Analysis: From Games to Inferences to Decisions to Deals. Negotiation Journal, Vol. 25, 2009, p. 449-466. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2009.00238.x/full . Accessed on: 24 Aug. 2016.
  11. SHEPSLE, Kenneth A. Analyzing politics: Rationality, Behavior and Institutions. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2010. p. 231-261.
  12. SILVA, Érica Barbosa e. Conciliação Judicial. 1. ed., v. 3. Brasília: Gazeta Jurídica, 2013. p. 96-103.
  13. STIPANOVICH, Thomas J. The International Evolution of Mediation: A Call for Dialogue and Deliberation. 46 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 1191 (2015). Pepperdine University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2016/1. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2712457 . Accessed on: 6 Nov. 2016.
  14. WIDENER, Michael N. The Five-Tool Mediator: Game Theory, Baseball Practices, and Southpaw Scouting. 12 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J., Vol. 12, Iss. 1, 2013. Available at: http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/drlj/vol12/iss1/3. Accessed on: 6 Nov. 2016.