找出最被接受的解決多元價值衝突的和平調解模式

Finding the Most Acceptable Peace Mediation Model among Multi-Value Conflict through Experiment

文明至今約五千年，但常因種族、宗教、甚至政治立場不同，發展到對立、衝突，甚至戰爭、屠殺。本研究目的即為找出較佳之和平調和方法而設計之研究。將90名男女大學生分實際演練群與填寫問卷群，各45人，前者在分ABCD 4隊，各指定完成ㄧ衝突情境的協商，情境是「政府將開放中東與非洲難民各萬名以盡國際義務，但目前有兩個對立的民間團體因立場衝突而需協商，A係自己找出調和方法、B係採賽局理論納許最佳完美結局三組法、C係以非暴力溝通法、D係採B法但只正反兩組，請每隊需再分均等人數的贊成團、反對團、調解團（但D組無調解團），在30分鐘內討論出雙方都可以接受的結果」最後並報告其調和之過程與結果。最後有42位大學生（18女，24男）各給ABCD四隊之協商結局表現評比1到4的排序，經換算給4到1分的評分，平均各為2.67、1.74、2.82、2.77，顯示C組最高，其次為D、A、B組。根據半結構之問題可知C有多出給彼此的尊重，而D有清楚的描述與協商架構。填寫問卷群前後詢問是否對家人與同輩會傾向調解都顯著較高，但內心衝突調和上則未達顯著差異。研究結論為心理學家提出之非暴力溝通法確實較有溫度，也注重互重互諒，而經濟學家提出的賽局理論則優勢在有清楚的架構建構調和。未來在和平教育與和平建構則在文末建議之列。

Due to differences in race, religion, and even political stance in around 5000-year human civilization, it often develops into confrontation, conflict, even war, and massacre. The purpose of this research is to find a better and peaceful method through experimental. The 90 university students were divided into practical exercise groups and questionnaire groups, each about 45 people. The former was divided into 4 groups ABCD, and each was designated to complete the negotiation of conflict situations. The situation is ''The government will open up to 10,000 refugees from the Middle East and Africa for accomplishing international obligations. But there were a need to negotiate two opposing civil organizations due to conflicting positions. Team A finds its own reconciliation method, Team B adopts the game theory to allow the best and perfect ending three sets of methods, and Department C uses non-violent communication methods. All teams further divided into three groups, which were pros, cons, and mediation group, except Team D, which only divided into two groups of pros and cons. All teams had to discuss a result acceptable to both parties within 30 minutes.'' Finally, report the process and results of its reconciliation. Eventually, 42 students (18 females, 24 males) gave the four ABCD teams a score of 1 to 4, with an average of 2.67, 1.74, 2.82, 2.77, showing that Team C is the highest, followed by D, A, and B. According to the semi-structure questionnaire, Team C had the best feedback since it showed respect each other, and Team D has a clear description and negotiation structure. Before and after filling the questionnaire, there were significantly more on the tendency to mediate the differences between family members and peers, but there was no difference in the reconciliation of inner conflicts. The conclusion of the study is that the nonviolent communication method proposed by psychologists is indeed warmer and emphasizes mutual understanding, while the game theory proposed by economists has the advantage of having a clear structure, construction, and coordination. The future of peace education and peace construction is suggested at the end.