The unexpected benefits of final deadlines in negotiation

Abstract Two experiments explored actual and predicted outcomes in competitive dyadic negotiations under time pressure. Participants predicted that final deadlines would hurt their negotiation outcomes. Actually, moderate deadlines improved outcomes for negotiators who were eager to get a deal quickly because the passage of time was costly to them. Participants’ erroneous predictions may be due to oversimplified and egocentric prediction processes that focus on the effects of situational constraints (deadlines) on the self and oversimplify or ignore their effects on others. The results clarify the psychological processes by which people predict the outcomes of negotiation and select negotiation strategies.

[1]  Herb Cohen,et al.  You Can Negotiate Anything , 1982 .

[2]  William H. Ross,et al.  Effects of interpersonal trust and time pressure on managerial mediation strategy in a simulated organizational dispute. , 1996 .

[3]  J. Kennan,et al.  Theories of Bargaining Delays , 1990, Science.

[4]  A. Roth,et al.  The Deadline Effect in Bargaining: Some Experimental Evidence , 1988 .

[5]  Max H. Bazerman,et al.  Egocentric Interpretations of Fairness in Asymmetric, Environmental Social Dilemmas: Explaining Harvesting Behavior and the Role of Communication , 1996 .

[6]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach , 1999 .

[7]  Sheryl B. Ball,et al.  An evaluation of learning in the bilateral winner's curse , 1991 .

[8]  A. Luchins.  Mechanization in problem solving: The effect of Einstellung. , 1942 .

[9]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Effects of fixed costs in two-person sequential bargaining , 1990 .

[10]  E. E. Jones,et al.  Perceiver-Induced Constraint: Interpretations of Self-Generated Reality , 1986 .

[11]  Richard E. Wilson,et al.  STARTEGIC BARGAINING MODELS AND INTERPRETATION ON STRIKE DATA. , 1989 .

[12]  J. Keith Murnighan,et al.  Phases, deadlines, and the bargaining process , 1994 .

[13]  D. Moore,et al.  Ultimatum Bargaining with a Group: Underestimating the Importance of the Decision Rule , 1997 .

[14]  R. Hastie,et al.  Social perception in negotiation , 1990 .

[15]  L. Thompson.  Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. , 1990 .

[16]  V. A. Harris,et al.  The Attribution of Attitudes , 1967 .

[17]  Sander L. Koole,et al.  On the Seizing and Freezing of Negotiator Inferences: Need for Cognitive Closure Moderates the Use of Heuristics in Negotiation , 1999 .

[18]  Alice F. Stuhlmacher,et al.  THE IMPACT OF TIME PRESSURE IN NEGOTIATION: A META‐ANALYSIS , 1998 .

[19]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: Effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping, and numerical anchoring ☆ , 1983 .

[20]  Ola Svenson,et al.  Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making , 1993 .

[21]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Determinants of Compromising Behavior in Negotiation , 1994 .

[22]  Peter J. Carnevale,et al.  Time Pressure in Negotiation and Mediation , 1993 .

[23]  Arie W. Kruglanski,et al.  Person Perception by Introverts and Extraverts Under Time Pressure: Effects of Need for Closure , 1991 .

[24]  S. Komorita,et al.  Effects of pressures to reach agreement in bargaining. , 1969 .

[25]  R. Nisbett,et al.  Swimming Upstream against the Fundamental Attribution Error: Subjects' Weak Generalizations from the Darley and Batson Study. , 1982 .