Jeyoon Chung began the presentation by administering a poll which asked participants if they believed the world is more polarized than it was 10 years ago, with over 90% answering yes. Chung then reviewed goals of the event which intended to cover different survey techniques, exploring the intersection between polarization and negotiator bias, and a discussion of best practices. Chung started off the agenda by explaining the term “group polarization”: discussing its significance, why it happens, and its relation to conflict resolution.

Cameron Molis then facilitated sending participants into breakout rooms to discuss times when they had someone, or they themselves, make assumptions about someone based on their nationality, culture, language, or place of origin. After the group discussion, Erica Zou began discussing the phenomenon of “transference” and how it approaches the issue of polarization from a more individualized perspective. Molis then administered the second half of the poll introduced earlier by Chung, which asked participants if polarization is a positive or negative force in society; participants overwhelmingly said polarization was negative.

Morikubo also covered the tool of reframing, which consists of removing inflammatory language while still maintaining the force of what someone has said. Matthew Robinson then discussed the issue of facts, feelings, and interests. Robinson discussed this three-part mechanism which entails the mediator uncovering the underlying issues and then constructs an environment where a party feels understood and is open to the process. Molis then facilitated another breakout room exercise where participants were presented with a hypothetical scenario and instructed to discuss how they would facilitate that mediation process. Following the breakout rooms, Molis facilitated a group discussion amongst the participants about what strategies they discussed using.