Save

Cognitive Frames of Track Two Practitioners: How Do They Affect (Best) Practice?

In: International Negotiation
Author:
Esra Çuhadar Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Bilkent University 06800 Bilkent, Ankara Turkey

Search for other papers by Esra Çuhadar in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution

Purchase

Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

$40.00

Abstract

This article explores the extent to which framing affects Track Two diplomacy practice and especially how the cognitive frames used by practitioners shape the design of their interventions. The framing effect is pervasive and shapes every type of action. Peacebuilding and Track Two work are no exception. Track Two practitioners often rely on frames as cognitive heuristics when they design their interventions. This article reports on the results of an online survey of 273 participants, using measures based on categories identified in two previous qualitative studies using the grounded theory approach. Four main frames used by practitioners are presented, along with examples from practice: psychologists, constructivists, capacity-builders, and realistic negotiators. Finally, the implications of being captive to the framing effect for Track Two practice are discussed. Steps are suggested towards making more deliberative and reflective context-specific decisions about interventions rather than “fast thinking” based on heuristics and bias.

Content Metrics

All Time Past 365 days Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 461 117 18
Full Text Views 111 15 11
PDF Views & Downloads 236 29 15