Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Intractable multiparty conflict is omnipresent in social life, but how do individuals in this type of dispute make sense of their situation and therefore enact it in a particular way? The current study investigated this question by examining how disputants from different stakeholder groups framed conflict situations in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Texas that revolved around environmental issues. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of interview transcripts and archival data suggested that, based on their framing similarities, disputants could be grouped together in four clusters, each implying a different framing repertoire. In turn, the analyses indicated that the repertoire differences between these clusters fueled the intractability of each dispute.
Brummans et al. (Sat,) studied this question.