Author
Listed:
- Alessandra Casella
(Columbia University [New York])
- Evan Friedman
(PSE - Paris School of Economics - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - ENPC - École nationale des ponts et chaussées - IP Paris - Institut Polytechnique de Paris, PJSE - Paris Jourdan Sciences Economiques - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - ENPC - École nationale des ponts et chaussées - IP Paris - Institut Polytechnique de Paris)
- Manuel Perez Archila
(Princeton University)
Abstract
Mediation of disputes is increasingly common, often implemented by computer-run algorithms. We test the efficacy of a theoretically optimal mediation algorithm in an experiment where two subjects, uncertain about each other's strength, negotiate how to share a resource. The subjects send cheap talk messages to one another (under direct communication) or to the computer mediator (under mediated communication) before expressing demands or receiving the mediator's non-binding recommendation. While messages to the mediator are more sincere, we find that peaceful resolution is not more frequent. The theoretical analysis shows that mediation is fragile precisely when it is most promising. When the optimal equilibrium improves over direct communication, any deviation from full truthfulness, no matter how small, causes a discontinuous downward jump in the probability of agreement.
Suggested Citation
Alessandra Casella & Evan Friedman & Manuel Perez Archila, 2026.
"On the Fragility of Mediation: Theory and Experimental Evidence,"
Post-Print
halshs-05667024, HAL.
Handle:
RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-05667024
DOI: 10.1093/jeea/jvaf049
Download full text from publisher
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's
web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-05667024. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.
Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-05667024.html