Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: A meta-analytic review and test of two theories.

A meta-analysis of 28 studies examined support for the Theory of Cooperation and Competition (M. Deutsch, 1973) and Dual Concern Theory (D. G. Pruitt & J. Z. Rubin, 1986). Effects of social motive (prosocial vs. egoistic) and resistance to yielding (high vs. low vs. unknown) on contenting, problem solving, and joint outcomes were examined. Consistent with Dual Concern Theory, results showed that negotiators were less contentious, engaged in more problem solving, and achieved higher joint outcomes when they had a prosocial rather than egoistic motive, but only when resistance to yielding was high (or unknown) rather than low. The authors also explored the moderating effects of study characteristics and found effects for participation inducement (class exercise, participant pool), for publication status, and for treatment of no-agreement dyads. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Bargainer characteristics in distributive and integrative negotiation.

Negotiation researchers theorize that individual differences are determinants of bargaining processes and outcomes but have yet to establish empirically the role of individual differences. In 2 studies the authors used bargaining simulations to examine the roles of personality and cognitive ability in distributive (Study 1) and integrative (Study 2) negotiation. The authors hypothesized and found evidence that Extraversion and Agreeableness are liabilities in distributive bargaining encounters. For both Extraversion and Agreeableness there were interactions between personality and negotiator aspirations such that personality effects were more pronounced in the absence of high aspirations. Contrary to predictions, Conscientiousness was generally unrelated to bargaining success. Cognitive ability played no role in distributive bargaining but was markedly related to the attainment of joint outcomes in a situation with integrative potential. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Team negotiation: An examination of integrative and distributive bargaining.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 70(3) of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (see record 2010-03549-001). Susan E. Brodt's department affiliation was listed incorrectly on p. 66. Her correct affiliation is The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University. It appears correctly in this record.] Two experiments compared the effectiveness of team and solo negotiators in integrative and distributive bargaining. When at least 1 party to a negotiation was a team, joint profit increased. Teams, more than solos, developed mutually beneficial trade-offs among issues and discovered compatible interests. The presence of at least 1 team increased information exchange and accuracy in judgments about the other party's interests in comparison with solo negotiations. The belief by both teams and solos that teams have a relative advantage over solo opponents was not supported by actual outcomes. Unexpectedly, neither private meetings nor friendships among team members improved the team's advantage. Teams of friends made less accurate judgments and reached fewer integrative agreements compared to teams of nonfriends. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Paying a price: Culture, trust, and negotiation consequences.

Three studies contrasting Indian and American negotiators tested hypotheses derived from theory proposing why there are cultural differences in trust and how cultural differences in trust influence negotiation strategy. Study 1 (a survey) documented that Indian negotiators trust their counterparts less than American negotiators. Study 2 (a negotiation simulation) linked American and Indian negotiators' self-reported trust and strategy to their insight and joint gains. Study 3 replicated and extended Study 2 using independently coded negotiation strategy data, allowing for stronger causal inference. Overall, the strategy associated with Indian negotiators' reluctance to extend interpersonal (as opposed to institutional) trust produced relatively poor outcomes. Our data support an expanded theoretical model of negotiation, linking culture to trust, strategies, and outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social motives and patterns of friendship.

35 male and 70 female undergraduates described 10 friendship episodes—interactions with friends that lasted at least 15–20 min—that occurred in the previous 2 wks. They also listed strong points, weak points, and reasons for friendship for each of 5 friends who appeared in the reported friendship episodes. Intimacy and power motivation were assessed via scores from a previous administration of the TAT. Ss high in intimacy motivation reported (a) more dyadic friendship episodes, (b) more self-disclosure among friends, (c) more listening, and (d) more concern for the well-being of friends than did those low in intimacy motivation. Power motivation was associated with more large-group interactions (among males only) and purposeful, agentic striving in friendship episodes. In general, motivational differences tended to outweigh sex differences. Results are interpreted in terms of D. Bakan's (1966) conceptualization of agency and communion. (48 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Goal motives, well-being, and physical health: An integrative model.

The present paper proposes an integrative model on the motivational determinants and health consequences of two forms of well-being (i.e., happiness and self-realization). This model posits that pursuing autonomous goals enhances both happiness and self-realization, whereas pursuing controlled goals thwarts these two same forms of well-being. The model further posits that self-realization, but not happiness, promotes physical health via the practise of more vigilant and less avoidant coping strategies, that lead to reduced stress. Empirical support for the model is reviewed and the model is discussed in terms of its theoretical and research implications. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of trust, aspiration, and gender on negotiation tactics.

Used 60 male and 60 female undergraduates in same sex dyads to study the effects of trust (defined as belief that the other negotiator is cooperatively motivated), aspirations, and gender on the conditions and processes leading to outcomes that jointly benefit both parties. Under high aspirations, high trust produced self-consciously cooperative behavior in the form of direct information exchange; low trust produced self-consciously distributive (competitive) behavior and one form of indirect information exchange. A correlational analysis showed that joint benefit was a positive function of a set of trial and error tactics and 2 forms of indirect information exchange, a negative function of the use of distributive tactics, and unrelated to direct information exchange. Joint benefit was greater under higher aspirations but was not a function of trust or the interaction between trust and aspirations. Women engaged in less distributive behavior and were less interested in the task than men, especially under high aspirations. A theory of strategic choice is presented to explain the findings. (14 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Team negotiation: An examination of integrative and distributive bargaining": Correction.

Reports an error in "Team negotiation: An examination of integrative and distributive bargaining" by Leigh Thompson, Erika Peterson and Susan E. Brodt (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996[Jan], Vol 70[1], 66-78). Susan E. Brodt's department affiliation was listed incorrectly on p. 66. Her correct affiliation is The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1996-01707-006.) Two experiments compared the effectiveness of team and solo negotiators in integrative and distributive bargaining. When at least 1 party to a negotiation was a team, joint profit increased. Teams, more than solos, developed mutually beneficial trade-offs among issues and discovered compatible interests. The presence of at least 1 team increased information exchange and accuracy in judgments about the other party's interests in comparison with solo negotiations. The belief by both teams and solos that teams have a relative advantage over solo opponents was not supported by actual outcomes. Unexpectedly, neither private meetings nor friendships among team members improved the team's advantage. Teams of friends made less accurate judgments and reached fewer integrative agreements compared to teams of nonfriends. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Unfixing the fixed pie: A motivated information-processing approach to integrative negotiation.

Negotiators tend to believe that own and other's outcomes are diametrically opposed. When such fixed-pie perceptions (FPPs) are not revised during negotiation, integrative agreements are unlikely. It was predicted that accuracy motivation helps negotiators to release their FPPs. In 2 experiments, accuracy motivation was manipulated by (not) holding negotiators accountable for the manner in which they negotiated. Experiment 1 showed that accountability reduced FPPs during face-to-face negotiation and produced more integrative agreements. Experiment 2 corroborated these results: Accountable negotiators revised their FPPs even when information exchange was experimentally held constant. Experiment 2 also showed that accountability is effective during the encoding of outcome information. Negotiators appear flexible in their reliance on FPPs, which is consistent with a motivated information processing model of negotiation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social anxiety and motives for alcohol use among adolescents.

Social anxiety evidences significant comorbidity with alcohol use disorders and alcohol-related problems. In an effort to better understand this co-occurrence, researchers are beginning to evaluate specific drinking-related factors, including alcohol use motives, among socially anxious individuals. Drawing on Cooper's (1994) 4-factor model of drinking motives (enhancement, social, conformity, coping), a growing body of work suggests that socially anxious individuals may consume alcohol in an effort to cope with their anxious symptoms; however, no study to date has examined these relations among youth. Accordingly, we examined alcohol use motives as a function of social anxiety in a community-based sample of 50 adolescents ages 12 to 17 years (Mage = 16.35, SD = 1.10). As predicted, heightened social anxiety was associated with elevated coping-related drinking motives. More important, other alcohol-use motives did not vary as a function of social anxiety. Collectively, these findings uniquely extend research conducted with adults, and suggest socially anxious youth may be motivated to use alcohol to manage their anxious arousal. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of trust in authority and procedural fairness on cooperation.

The present research examined the effect of procedural fairness and trust in an authority on people's willingness to cooperate with the authority across a wide range of social situations. Prior research has shown that the presence of information about whether an authority can be trusted moderates the effect of procedural fairness. If no trust information is available, procedural fairness influences people's reactions. This is not the case when information about the trustworthiness of the authority is present. In the present article, it is argued that information about whether the authority can or cannot be trusted may also moderate the effect of procedural fairness in predicting levels of cooperation. Assuming that the use of fair procedures by authorities that cannot be trusted is less influential than is the enactment of procedures by trustworthy authorities, it is predicted that trust in authority moderates the influence of procedural fairness on cooperation in such a way that procedural fairness has a positive effect on cooperation primarily when trust in authority is high. Results from 4 studies (2 experimental studies and 2 field studies) provide supportive evidence for this interaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Majority and minority influence in group negotiation: The moderating effects of social motivation and decision rules.

In organizational groups, often a majority has aligned preferences that oppose those of a minority. Although such situations may give rise to majority coalitions that exclude the minority or to minorities blocking unfavorable agreements, structural and motivational factors may stimulate groups to engage in integrative negotiation, leading to collectively beneficial agreements. An experiment with 97 3-person groups was designed to test hypotheses about the interactions among decision rule, the majority's social motivation, and the minority's social motivation. Results showed that under unanimity rule, minority members block decisions, thus harming the group, but only when the minority has proself motivation. Under majority rule, majority members coalesce at the minority's expense, but only when the majority has a proself motivation. Implications for negotiation research and group decision making are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The punitive beliefs and behaviors of adolescent delinquent boys.

In a study with 22 institutionalized male delinquent and 22 matched high school students, delinquents were found to have very punitive beliefs relative to previously tested populations. The delinquents tended to have more punitive beliefs and did have more punitive behavior than the controls. Responses to Piagetian interview stories that represented 3 relationships between thief and victim (adolescent to mother, teacher, or peer) were significantly different with the mother story eliciting the most number of punitive responses. In a subsequent rat-training procedure the delinquent boys used punishment as their predominant response to the "misbehaving" rat showing cooccurrence of punitive belief and behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Now you see it, now you don't: Interests, issues, and psychological distance in integrative negotiation.

Negotiators are often advised to seek win–win agreements by focusing on interests (primary features) rather than issues (secondary features), but whether such advice is valid remains to be seen. Consistent with construal level theory (Y. Trope & N. Liberman, 2003), Experiments 1 and 2 show that negotiators focus on secondary features (issues) more than on primary features (interests) when psychological distance is low rather than high, and concomitant construal level is local and specific rather than global and abstract. Experiment 3 showed that high construal level promoted problem-solving behavior and therefore facilitated the achievement of win–win agreement, but only when integrative potential resided in underlying interests; when integrative potential resided in the issues, low construal level negotiators achieved higher joint outcomes. Thus, both low- and high-construal negotiators may achieve win–win agreements when such agreements require trade-offs at the level of issues, or at the level of underlying interests, respectively. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of interpersonal trust on work group performance.

This study explored 2 questions: Does the level of trust within a group affect group performance? If so, how does this relationship operate? An experimental method was used to examine 2 roles through which interpersonal trust could affect group performance: a main effect and a moderating effect. The data do not support the main effect that has dominated the literature on interpersonal trust. The data do support the moderating role: Trust seems to influence how motivation is converted into work group processes and performance. On the basis of these findings, it is suggested that trust may be best understood as a construct that influences group performance indirectly by channeling group members' energy toward reaching alternative goals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social exchange theory: An integrative approach to social conformity.

Theoretical and research studies of social conformity are reviewed and integrated through a revised social exchange model. The concept of utility is discarded from the basic economic model in favor of a revealed preference, and this approach is then applied to the existing work on social conformity and approval. The behavior of Ss in conformity and approval studies is assumed to reflect a preference in the manner done in economics. Predictions made from the exchange model are found to be consistent with the existing knowledge about conformity. It is concluded that exchange theory provides a useful vehicle for data integration and generation of new hypotheses about social conformity. The model allows for the process of social conformity to be considered in dynamic terms, treating the influence source and influenced person simultaneously. (7 p. ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Supplication and appeasement in conflict and negotiation: The interpersonal effects of disappointment, worry, guilt, and regret.

This study examined the social effects of emotions related to supplication and appeasement in conflict and negotiation. In a computer-simulated negotiation, participants in Experiment 1 were confronted with a disappointed or worried opponent (supplication), with a guilty or regretful opponent (appeasement), or with a nonemotional opponent (control). Compared with controls, participants conceded more when the other experienced supplication emotions and conceded less when the other experienced appeasement emotions (especially guilt). Experiment 2 replicated the effects of disappointment and guilt and showed that they are moderated by the perceiver's dispositional trust: Negotiators high in trust conceded more to a disappointed counterpart than to a happy one, but those with low trust were unaffected. In Experiment 3, trust was manipulated through information about the other's personality (cooperative vs. competitive), and a similar moderation was obtained. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The structure of childhood disruptive behaviors.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) frequently co-occur. Comorbidity of these 2 childhood disruptive behavior domains has not been satisfactorily explained at either a structural or etiological level. The current study evaluated a bifactor model, which allows for a “g” factor in addition to distinct component factors, in relation to other models to improve understanding of the structural relationship between ADHD and ODD. Participants were 548 children (321 boys, 227 girls) between the ages of 6 years and 18 years who participated in a comprehensive diagnostic assessment incorporating parent and teacher ratings of symptoms. Of these 548 children, 153 children were diagnosed with ADHD (without ODD), 114 children were diagnosed with ADHD + ODD, 26 children were diagnosed with ODD (without ADHD), and 239 children were classified as non-ADHD/ODD comparison children (including subthreshold cases). ADHD symptoms were assessed via parent report on a diagnostic interview and via parent and teacher report on the ADHD Rating Scale. ODD symptoms were assessed via teacher report. A bifactor model of disruptive behavior, comprising a “g” factor and the specific factors of ADHD and ODD, exhibited best fit, compared to 1-factor, 2-factor, 3-factor, and 2nd-order factor models of disruptive behaviors. It is concluded that a bifactor model of childhood disruptive behaviors is superior to existing models and may help explain common patterns of comorbidity between ADHD and ODD. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social support, appraisals of event controllability, and coping: An integrative model.

An integrative model of mediating and moderating mechanisms in the coping process was examined in a 2-yr prospective framework with 175 college students using both single-group and multigroup LISREL analyses. Consistent with the hypothesized model, initial parental support was associated with subsequent changes in psychological adjustment both directly and indirectly through adaptive coping strategies. Moreover, as predicted, appraisals of event controllability moderated both the degree to which parental support influenced coping and the effectiveness of coping responses. With controllable events, family support predicted adaptive coping, and coping predicted changes in adjustment. With uncontrollable events, family support related directly to changes in adjustment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intragroup decision making in intergroup negotiation: Majority/minority effects and hawkishness of member preferences.

Participants took part in an intergroup negotiation. In the first stage participants recorded their individual preferences (i.e., which of several possible options they should strive to achieve during the negotiation) for each negotiation issue. In the second stage they repeated this process as part of a 3-person cooperative group in preparation for the negotiation task. Our results show that the decision aggregation of negotiation teams is driven by 2 factors: The majority/minority status of the members advocating a given option and the extent to which the option advocated by a member was more hawkish (i.e., advantageous to the ingroup) than that of fellow members. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)