ARGUMENTATIVE TALK IN DIVORCE MEDIATION SESSIONS

Increasingly, mediation is used as an alternative to institutionalized forms of conflict resolution in which settlements are imposed by judg es, arbitrators, or other ''neutral'' adjudicators. To assess the equi ty and effectiveness of the various types of mediation, it is first ne cessary to explain how mediators and disputants manage their interacti ons. In this paper we analyze the management of arguments in sessions recorded at a divorce mediation agency. We find that the disputants do not always rely on mediators to initiate exits from their arguments. Instead they initiate exits on their own, often closing their argument ative exchanges without the mediators' assistance. The practices used to exit arguments in the sessions are prevalent in ordinary conversati on, but their use here exhibits an orientation to conventions associat ed with mediation. This limits both the duration of arguments and the intensity of verbal conflict. Our findings raise important questions a bout rite interactional organization of mediation sessions; we discuss these questions in light of previous research on verbal conflict in m ediation hearings organized to preclude argument.