CODING NATURALISTIC NEGOTIATION INTERACTION

While much recent work has attempted to code negotiation interaction to identify how individuals use communication tactics in negotiation settings, many coding schemes have been developed to analyze simulated activities and may not be appropriate for the analysis of formal, professional negotiation events. Moreover, most coding research has failed to focus on the relationships between individual tactics and larger communication strategies. This article proposes a coding mechanism sensitive to formal, naturally occurring communication in negotiation settings and capable of identifying strategic use of individual tactics. The coding scheme is then applied to simulated and naturalistic negotiation interaction and the resulting data are assessed, using lag sequential analysis. Significant differences are reflected between the naturalistic and simulated interactions and strong patterns of communication strategy are identified.     

Adult-child discourse: Developmental interaction between information processing and linguistic knowledge

In the present study, the discourse interaction between adult and child was examined in terms of the content of their utterances, and the linguistic and contextual relations between their messages, in order to investigate how children use the information from adults' input sentences to form contingent responses. The analyses described were based on longitudinal data from four children from approximately 21 to 36 months of age. Categories of child discourse, their development and their interactions with aspects of prior adult utterances form the major results of the study. Child utterances were identified as adjacent (immediately preceded by an adult utterance), or as nonadjacent (not immediately preceded by an adult utterance). Adjacent utterances were either contingent (shared the same topic and added new information relative to the topic of the prior utterance), imitative (shared the same topic but did not add new information), or noncontingent (did not share the same topic). From the beginning, the adjacent speech was greater than nonadjacent speech. Contingent speech increased over time; in particular, linguistically contingent speech (speech that expanded the verb relation of the prior adult utterance with added or replaced constituents within a clause) showed the greatest developmental increase. Linguistically contingent speech occurred more often after questions than nonquestions. The results are discussed in terms of how the differential requirements for processing information in antecedent messages is related to language learning.     

回报谨慎对谈判过程和谈判结果的影响

回报谨慎是人们害怕在人际关系中被他人利用的一种信念。研究考察了回报谨慎对谈判者的动机倾向、谈判行为及谈判结果的影响。184人组成92个两人小组参加了一项模拟商业谈判,谈判前研究者成功地进行了回报谨慎的操纵,谈判结束后,参加谈判的人完成谈判协议和谈判后问卷。研究者假设,低回报谨慎的谈判者比高回报谨慎的谈判者在谈判中更可能持有合作倾向、更多地与谈判对手分享信息,研究者还预测回报谨慎与谈判双方的联合收益以及谈判后对谈判对手的看法都有关系。研究结果支持了上述假设。研究对从事商业谈判的人具有实际意义。     

Negotiation, Persuasion and Argument

Argument is often taken to deal with conflicting opinion or belief, while negotiation deals with conflicting goals or interests. It is widely accepted that argument ought to comply with some principles or norms. On the other hand, negotiation and bargaining involve concession exchange and tactical use of power, which may be contrasted with attempts to convince others through argument. However, there are cases where it is difficult to draw a clear distinction between bargaining and argument: notably cases where negotiators persuade others through `framing' and cases where the aims of negotiation have to do with public assertion and acceptance. Those cases suggest that the distinction between negotiation and argument is not absolute, and this raises the question whether rules about what is acceptable in argument and rules about what is acceptable in negotiation can all be viewed as instances of more general common norms about human interaction.     

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN NEGOTIATION OUTCOME: A META-ANALYSIS

Studies reporting the objective settlements obtained by men and women in negotiations were reviewed. Differences in outcomes were expected due to differences in perceptions, behaviors, and contextual factors between men and women. In the sample of studies, men negotiated significantly better outcomes than women. Opponent sex, relative power of the negotiator, integrative potential of the task, mode of communication and year of the study were tested as moderators of the effect. Although the overall difference in outcomes between men and women was small, none of these hypothesized moderators or several exploratory moderators reversed or eliminated this effect. The organizational significance of the findings is discussed in terms of the glass ceiling, a gender-based earnings differential and women in negotiation positions. Directions for future research in the laboratory and the field are suggested.     

AN EXAMINATION OF IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT USE AND EFFECTIVENESS ACROSS ASSESSMENT CENTER EXERCISES: THE ROLE OF COMPETENCY DEMANDS

We report 2 studies that examine how promotional candidates use verbal and nonverbal impression management (IM) tactics across several structured assessment center exercises that differ in the competency demands they place on candidates. Based on the competency-demand hypothesis ( Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993a, 1993b ), it was predicted that IM use would occur most frequently and have the strongest effects on assessor evaluations in exercises that place greater demands on candidates' interpersonal skills than in exercises that depend primarily on technical skills. In both studies, IM tactics were generally used more frequently and there was more variability in IM use for those exercises requiring candidates to display interpersonal competencies (i.e., the role-plays and mock presentation) relative to the exercise that did not (i.e., the tactical exercise). The relationship between IM use and assessor evaluations was also influenced by the competencies assessed by the exercises, and IM use related to both interpersonal and noninterpersonal ratings of performance.     

Negotiator confidence: The impact of self-efficacy on tactics and outcomes

In a series of four studies, we examined whether and how negotiators’ task-related self-efficacy affects their performance. In the first two studies, we identified two theoretically meaningful self-efficacy constructs—distributive self-efficacy (DSE) and integrative self-efficacy (ISE)—and provided evidence of construct validity. In the third study, task-congruent self-efficacy was positively associated with negotiators’ self-reports of tactical decision-making. In the fourth study, we measured negotiators’ tactics and found that ISE and DSE affected negotiators’ initial choice of tactics. We conclude that ISE and DSE predisposes negotiators to select certain tactics, which then guide the course of the negotiation, and, ultimately, affect the quality of deals.     

A Cylindrical Model of Communication Behavior in Crisis Negotiations

This article integrates existing theoretical perspectives on message content and negotiator motivation to formulate a comprehensive definitional model of the interrelationships among communication behaviors in crisis negotiation. A sample of 189 nuclear dialogue spans were transcribed from 9 resolved cases of hostage negotiation and each utterance coded at the level of thought units across 41 behavioral variables. Results of a nonmetric, multidimensional scaling solution provided clear support for the hypothesized cylindrical structure of communication behavior, revealing 3 dominant levels of suspect‐negotiator interaction (Avoidance, Distributive, Integrative). At each level of the structure, interactions were found to modulate around 3 thematic styles of communication (Identity, Instrumental, Relational), which reflected the underlying motivational emphasis of individuals' dialogue. Finally, the intensity of communication was found to play a polarizing role in the cylinder, with intense, functionally discrete behaviors occurring toward the boundary of the structure.     

Subjective Social Standing and Conflict Tactics Among Young Kenyan Men

Efforts to reduce intimate partner violence in sub‐Saharan Africa generally approach the issue through the lens of women's empowerment. These efforts include foci on women's relative power in the relationship, educational background, and earning potential. The social status of men has largely been ignored, reducing the potential to involve them in efforts to demote intimate partner violence. In this study we consider whether a man's perceived social status predicts conflict tactics, and whether these tactics are mediated by loneliness and collective self‐esteem from a community‐based sample in semi‐rural Kenya (n = 263). We find that men who reported lower perceived social status also reported significantly more frequent violent conflicts with their intimate partners. This association was significantly, and completely, mediated by lower collective self‐esteem and higher loneliness. There was no direct association between subjective social status and negotiation‐based conflict tactics, although there was an indirect association. Men with higher perceived social status reported higher collective self‐esteem, and men with higher collective self‐esteem reported more negotiation‐based conflict tactics. These findings inform efforts to reduce intimate partner violence by involving men, showing potential to reduce violence by building self‐esteem among men—particularly those with lower perceived social status.     

Manipulation in Close Relationships: Five Personality Factors in Interactional Context

This research had three basic goals: (a) to identify manipulation tactics used in close relationships; (b) to document empirically the degree of generality and specificity of tactical deployment across relationship types (mates, friends, parents); and (c) to identify links between five major personality dimensions and the usage of manipulation tactics. Twelve manipulation tactics were identified through separate factor analyses of two instruments based on different data sources: Charm, Reason, Coercion, Silent Treatment, Debasement, and Regression (replicating Buss et al., 1987), and Responsibility Invocation, Reciprocity, Monetary Reward, Pleasure Induction, Social Comparison, and Hardball (an amalgam of threats, lies, and violence). The Big Five personality factors were assessed through three separate data sources: self-report, spouse report, and two independent interviewers. Personality factors showed coherent links with tactics, including Surgency (Coercion, Responsibility, Invocation), Desurgency (Debasement), Agreeableness (Pleasure Induction), Disagreeableness (Coercion), Conscientiousness (Reason), Emotional Instability (Regression), and Intellect-Openness (Reason). Discussion focuses on the consequences of the five personality factors for social interaction in close relationships.     

Motivated by guilt and low felt trust: The impact of negotiators' anger expressions on the implementation of negotiated agreements

Prior research has identified benefits from certain emotion tactics in negotiation, particularly expressing anger to achieve short‐term gains. We demonstrate that such tactics can be strategically problematic due to their impact on an actor's emotions and felt trust. Through five studies, we find that negotiators' use of anger tactics during a negotiation increased their feelings of guilt and reduced the extent to which they felt trusted by their counterpart following the negotiation. We found this guilt to be the result of their aggressive tone and how they treated their counterpart. The guilt and diminished felt trust in turn motivated negotiators to engage in greater cooperative behaviors during the deal implementation process that benefited their counterpart, even if doing so was costly to the negotiator. Our results demonstrate that negotiator guilt and felt trust resulting from anger tactics influence the dynamic relationship between negotiators and their counterparts. This in turn has strategic implications for negotiators, who attempt to mitigate these negative feelings during the crucial implementation phase of a negotiated agreement.     

谈判中的时间因素

研究时间因素对谈判的影响有利于提高人们对时间重要性的认识,有效谈判策略的运用和整合结果的实现。时间因素对谈判者认知、行为和谈判结果的影响具体表现在：时间压力会降低谈判者的认知动机,使谈判者更加依赖认知启发式;暂停和中场休息是否会为谈判带来积极影响应该视不同的谈判事件和不同的心理状态而定;拉大谈判与结果实现之间的时间距离会提高谈判的共同结果,这可以从折扣效应和建构水平理论中得到解释。将来的谈判研究会进一步从时间向空间拓展     

The prospect of negotiating: Stress, cognitive appraisal, and performance

Despite a significant literature on the impact of stress on performance in achievement settings, little is known about whether and how stress might matter for would-be negotiators. In two studies, we investigate how bargainers cognitively appraise a looming negotiation, whether its prospect is stressful and what the consequences are for performance. Individuals who appraised a prospective negotiation as a threat experienced more stress ahead of a negotiation, and reached lower quality deals compared to those who had appraised a challenge. Results from a follow-up experiment showed that would-be negotiators who had appraised a threat behaved more passively and were less likely to use tough tactics compared to those who appraised a challenge. Those who appraised a threat also had relatively inaccurate perceptions of their partners’ priorities and interests, which undermined their outcomes. The outcome advantage for those who appraised a challenge was limited to negotiations that contained integrative potential.     

The use of mental health professional consultants to police hostage negotiation teams

Three hundred law enforcement agencies in the United States that employ a negotiator in hostage incidents responded to a survey regarding the use of mental health professionals as consultants to the negotiation team. Thirty-nine percent of the agencies with a negotiator use a mental health professional consultant to the negotiation team. Police agencies that use a mental health professional as a consultant on negotiation techniques reported more hostage incidents ending by negotiated surrender and fewer hostage incidents ending by tactical team assault and arrest of the perpetrator. Also, police agencies that use a mental health professional as a consultant on the assessment of the perpetrator reported fewer hostage incidents resulting in the serious injury or death of a hostage. Although these results are only correlational, they raise the possibility that the use of mental health professionals as consultants to police hostage negotiation teams may decrease the risk of hostage injury and death.     

Threats,Bluffs, and Disclaimers in Negotiations

In a buyer-seller simulation within two negotiation periods, we examined the attitudinal and behavioral consequences of variations in the communication of threats. Specifically, we examined the consequences of receiving no threat or a threat stated with, versus without, a disclaimer. In addition, we examined changes in subjects′ evaluations of their partner and negotiation outcomes after some were led to believe their partner had stated a false threat (a "bluff"). As expected, we found that while negotiators who used threats were perceived as more powerful, they were also perceived as less cooperative and achieved less integrative agreements than those who did not use threats. In addition, when information (allegedly from a constituent) identified the threat as a bluff, we found that the disclaimer lessened the negativity of re-evaluations of the negotiation partner. Taken together, our findings suggest that current theory regarding the effect of threats and bluffs in negotiation needs to be qualified by how these tactics are stated. Theoretical and practical implications of our findings are discussed.     

Predicting Negotiation Performance from Personality Traits: A field Study across Multiple Occupations

Based on decades-old reviews, many negotiation researchers have expressed doubts about the effect of personality on negotiation outcomes. More recent reviews have found significant associations between traits and outcome measures. Existing research has primarily used laboratory experiments; field studies are rare. In this study, we aim to fill that important gap. Traits measured using the Hogan Personality Inventory were correlated with supervisor ratings of negotiation performance across three occupations: marketing managers, lawyers, and construction supervisors. Ambition and likability independently predicted greater negotiation performance. Results generalized across these three samples with evidence for an interaction effect in the lawyer sample. For attorneys, greater ambition was not additionally helpful for those who were relatively more likable. Results establish the importance of negotiation effectiveness as a distinct component of overall job performance. Practical implications are considered in terms of division of labor, person–job fit, and the state-trait distinction.     

Getting to Best: Efficiency versus Optimality in Negotiation

Negotiation between two individuals is a common task that typically involves two goals: maximize individual outcomes and obtain an agreement. However, research on the simplest negotiation tasks demonstrates that although naive subjects can be induced to improve their performance, they are often no more likely to achieve fully optimal solutions. The present study tested the prediction that a decrease in a particular type of argumentative behavior, substantiation, would result in an increase in optimal agreements. As substantiation behaviors depend primarily on supplied content of the negotiation task, it was also predicted that substantiation behavior would be reduced by curtailing the content. A 2 × 2 experimental design was employed, where both negotiation tactics (list of tactics present versus absent) and negotiation task content (high versus low) were varied to determine the processes leading beyond solution improvement to solution optimality. Sixty‐one dyads engaged in a two‐party, four‐issue negotiation task. All negotiations were videotaped and analyzed. Although the list of negotiation tactics resulted in improved performance, only the content manipulation resulted in a significant increase in dyads achieving optimal solutions. Analyses of the coded protocols indicated that the key difference in achieving optimality was a reduction in persistent substantiation‐related operators (substantiation, along with single‐issue preferences and procedures) and an increase in a complex macro‐operator, multi‐issue offers that reduced the problem space, facilitating the search for optimality.     

Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement

The authors tested a motivated information-processing model of negotiation: To reach high joint outcomes, negotiators need a deep understanding of the task, which requires them to exchange information and to process new information systematically. All this depends on social motivation, epistemic motivation (EM), and their interaction. Indeed, when EM (manipulated by holding negotiators process accountability or not) was high rather than low and prosocial rather than proself, negotiators recall more cooperative than competitive tactics (Experiment 1), had more trust, and reached higher joint outcomes (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 showed that under high EM, negotiators who received cooperative, rather than competitive, tactics reached higher joint outcomes because they engaged in more problem solving. Under low EM, negotiators made more concessions and reached low joint outcomes. Implications for negotiation theory and for future work in this area are discussed.     

Gestalt compositionality and instruction-based meaning construction

We would like to propose a new model of meaning construction based on language comprehension considered as a dynamic process during which the meaning of each linguistic unit and the global meaning of the sentence are determined simultaneously. This model, which may be called “gestalt compositionality,” is radically opposed to the classic compositional mechanism advocated by linguistic formalism based on the primacy of syntax. The process considers the syntactic structure of an utterance as the product of meaning construction rather than its source. The comprehension of an utterance is consequently directly based on the interaction between the different basic components of this utterance: lexical units, grammatical markers, positional relations between units, and more generally, basic “constructions” in the sense of Construction Grammar. Thus, meaning is really the result of a gestalt compositional process insomuch as the contribution of each basic component depends on the contribution of the other components present in the utterance. We show a first attempt at modeling from French and English examples.