Lose-Lose Agreements in Interdependent Decision Making

Psychological Bulletin

Volumn 122, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 396-409

  Thompson, Leigh ^a,c,e   Hrebec, Dennis ^b,d  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Engineering Research Associates   (United States)

^c NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d Hum Engineering Research Associates   (United States)

^e STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2242453321     PISSN: 00332909     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.120.3.396     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Asch, S. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 19, 31-35.
2. Aubert, V. (1963). Competition and dissensus: Two types of conflict and conflict resolution. Conflict Resolution, 7, 26-42.
3. *Babcock, L., Thompson, L., & Murnighan, K. (1994, June). Information, incentives, and opportunity: An examination of experienced and naive negotiators. Paper presented at the meetings of the International Association of Conflict Management, Eugene, OR.
4. Balke, W. M., Hammond, K. R., & Meyer, G. D. (1973). An alternate approach to labor-management relations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 311-327.
5. Balzer, W., Doherty, M., & O'Connor, R. (1989). Effects of cognitive feedback on performance. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 410-433.
6. Baumeister, R., & Newman, L. (1994). Self-regulation of cognitive inference and decision processes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 3-19.
7. Bazerman, M. H., & Carroll, J. (1987). Negotiator cognition. In B. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 247-288). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
8. Bazerman, M. H., & Neale, M. A. (1983). Heuristics in negotiation: Limitations to effective dispute resolution. In M. H. Bazerman & R. J. Lewicki (Eds.), Negotiating in organizations (pp. 51-67). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
9. *Bottom, W. P. (1994). Scripts and schemas: Two sources of expertise in negotiation. Manuscript in preparation. Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
10. *Buck, M. (1993-1994). [Negotiation]. Unpublished raw data. Northwestern University, Evanston. IL, and Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
11. Burton, J. W. (1987). Track two: An alternative to power politics. In J. W. McDonald & D. B. Bendahmane (Eds.), Conflict resolution: Track two diplomacy (pp. 65-72). Washington, DC: Foreign Service Institute.
12. Coombs, C., & Avrunin, G. S. (1988). The structure of conflict. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13. Dawes, R. M., Singer, D., & Lemons, F. (1972). An experimental analysis of the contrast effect and its implications for intergroup communication and the indirect assessment of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 281-295.
14. *DeHarpport, T. (1994). Friends and acquaintances as sources of feedback in negotiations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.
15. Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16. Druckman, D., & Zechmeister, K. (1973). Conflict of interest and value dissensus: Propositions on the sociology of conflict. Human Relations, 26, 449-466.
17. Einhorn, H. (1980). Learning from experience and suboptimal rules in decision making. In T. Wallsten (Ed.), Cognitive processes in choice and decision behavior (pp. 1-20). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
19. Froman, L. A., & Cohen, M. D. (1970). Compromise and logroll: Comparing the efficiency of two bargaining processes. Behavioral Science, 30, 180-183.
20. Funder, D. (1987). Errors and mistakes: Evaluating the accuracy of social judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 75-90.
21. Gibbons, R. (1992). Game theory for applied economists. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22. Goodman, L. A., & Kruskal, W. H. (1972). Measures of association for cross-clarifications. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 415-421.
23. *Graetz, K. A., Macbeth, S., Seifert, J., Sacher, J., & Kozar, R. (1994). Effects of mental workload and electronic negotiation support on fixed-pie perceptions. Unpublished manuscript, University of Dayton, Dayton, OH.
24. Hammond, K., Stewart, T., Brehmer, B., & Steinmann, D. (1975). Social judgment theory. In M. Kaplan & S. Schwartz (Eds.), Human judgment and decision processes (pp. 271-312). New York: Academic Press.
25. Hardin, G. (1968, December 13). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243-1248.
26. Harsanyi, J. (1962). Bargaining in ignorance of the opponent's utility function. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 6, 29-38.
27. Harvey, J. B. (1988). The Abilene paradox and other meditations on management. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
28. *Hrebec, D., & Thompson, L. (1994). The effect of opponent type on the resolution of negotiations with compatible issues. Manuscript in preparation. University of Washington, Seattle.
29. Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascos. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
30. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. (1987). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. American Economic Review, 76, 728-741.
31. Kelley, H. (1966). A classroom study of dilemmas in interpersonal negotiations. In K. Archibald (Ed.), Strategic intervention and conflict (pp. 49-73). Berkeley, CA: University of California, Institute of International Studies.
32. Kelley, H., & Stahelski, A. J. (1970). Social interaction basis of cooperators' and competitors' beliefs about others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 66-91.
33. Kelley, H., & Thibaut, J. (1969). Group problem solving. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 33-51). New York: Random House.
34. *Kernan, M. C., & Conlon, D. E. (1995). The role of affect and discrepancy information in multiple negotiations. Unpublished manuscript, University of Delaware, Newark.
35. Klayman, J., & Ha, Y.-W. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis-testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211-228.
36. Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). The psychology of being "right": On the problem of accuracy in social perception and cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 395-409.
37. Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1986). The manager as negotiator. New York: Free Press.
38. Levine, J., & Thompson, L. (1996). Conflict in groups. In E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Handbook of social psychological principles. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
39. *McCusker, C., & Bontempo, B. (1994). An experimental analysis of group identity and negotiation between management students at Yale and Columbia. Manuscript in preparation, Yale University, New Haven, CT.
40. Messick, D. (1992). Equality as a decision heuristic. In B. Meilers & J. Baron (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on justice: Theory and applications (pp. 11-31). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
41. Messick, D., & McClintock, C. (1968). Motivational bases of choice in experimental games. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 1-25.
42. Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1991). Cognition and rationality in negotiation. New York: Free Press.
43. Newcomb, T. M. (1968). Interpersonal balance. In R. P. Abelson, E. Aronson, W. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, & P. H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A source book. Chicago: Rand McNally.
44. *O'Connor, K. M., & Carnevale, P. J. (in press). A nasty but effective negotiation strategy: Misrepresentation of a common value issue. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
45. Ohbuchi, K., & Fukuno, M. (1994). Cognitive biases in negotiation: In the case of Japanese. Unpublished manuscript.
46. *Pinkley, R. (1995). The impact of knowledge regarding alternatives to settlement in dyadic negotiation: Whose knowledge counts? Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 403-417.
47. *Pinkley, R., Griffith, T., & Northcraft, G. (1995). "Fixed pie" a la mode: Information availability, information processing, and the negotiation of sub-optimal agreements. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 101-112.
48. *Pinkley, R., Neale, M., & Bennett, R. (in press). The impact of alternatives to settlement in dyadic negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
49. Pinkley, R., & Northcraft, G. (1993). Cognitive interpretations of conflict: Implications for dispute processes and outcomes. Unpublished manuscript. Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX.
50. *Polzer, J., & Neale, M. (1993). Constraints or catalysts? Reexamining goal selling within the context of negotiation. Manuscript in preparation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
51. Pruitt, D. G., & Lewis, S. A. (1975). Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 621-633.
52. Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
53. Rapoport, A., & Chammah, A. (1965). Prisoner's dilemma: A study in conflict and cooperation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
54. Robinson, R. J., & Keltner, D. (1996). Much ado about nothing? Revisionists and traditionalists choose an introductory English syllabus. Psychological Science, 7, 18-24.
55. Robinson, R., Keltner, D., Ward, A., & Ross, L. (1995). Actual versus assumed differences in construal: "Naive realism" in intergroup perception and conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 404-424.
56. Ross, L., & Ward, A. (1994). Psychological barriers to dispute resolution. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 27). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
57. Rothbart, M., & Hallmark, W. (1988). In-group and out-group differences in the perceived efficacy of coercion and conciliation in resolving social conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 248-257.
58. Rubin, J., Kim, S. H., & Peretz, N. M. (1990). Expectancy effects and negotiation. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 125-139.
59. Rubin, J. Z., Pruitt, D. G., & Kim, S. H. (1994). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
60. Schelling, T. (1960). The strategy of conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
61. *Schkade, D. (1993-1994). [Managemenl]. Unpublished raw data. Universily of Texas at Austin.
62. Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New York: Harper & Row.
63. *Sondak, H., Neale, M., & Pinkley, R. (1994). The allocation of goods and bads: The impact of contribution, outcome valence, and relationship. Manuscript in preparation, Duke University, Durham, NC.
64. Thibaut, J., & Kelley, H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York: Wiley.
65. *Thompson, L. (1990a). An examination of naive and experienced negotiators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 259, 82-90.
66. *Thompson, L. (1990b). The influence of experience on negotiation performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 528-544.
67. *Thompson, L. (1991). Information exchange in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 161-179.
68. *Thompson, L. (1993). The impact of negotiation on intergroup relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 304-325.
69. *Thompson, L. (1995). "They saw a negotiation": Partisanship and involvement in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 839-853.
70. *Thompson, L., & DeHarpport, T. (1992). Personal relationships, schemas, and task expectancies in negotiations. Manuscript in preparation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
71. Thompson, L., & DeHarpport, T. (1993). Relationships, task construal, and communal orientation in negotiations. Unpublished manuscript. Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
72. *Thompson, L., & DeHarpport, T. (1994). Social judgment, feedback, and interpersonal learning in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 327-345.
73. *Thompson, L., Gonzalez, R., & Fulton, W. (1993). Analogical reasoning in negotiations. Manuscript in preparation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
74. *Thompson, L., & Hastie, R. (1990). Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 98-123.
75. Thompson, L., & Loewenstein, G. (1992). Egocentric interpretations of fairness and negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 176-197.
76. *Thompson, L., Peterson, E., & Brodt, S. (1996). Team negotiation: An examination of integrative and distributive bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 66-78.
77. *Thompson, L., Valley, K., & Kramer, R. (1995). The bittersweet feeling of success in negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 467-492.
78. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974, September 27). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
79. Walton, R. E., & McKersie, R. B. (1965). A behavioral theory of labor relations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
80. Weingart, L., Thompson, L., Bazerman, M. H., & Carroll, J. S. (1990). Tactical behavior and negotiation outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1, 7-31.
81. Zebrowitz, L. (1990). Social perception. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/ Cole.