«They saw a negotiation»: partisanship and involvement

The incompatibility error is the belief that the other party's interests are completely opposed to one's own in a negotiation situation, when in fact, the other party's interests are completely compatible with one's own. In Experiment 1, partisan and nonpartisan observers viewed a negotiation. Nonpartisan observers were more likely to detect compatible interests than the actual negotiators. In Experiment 2, high involvement worsened judgment accuracy among partisan observers but improved judgment accuracy among nonpartisan observers. Experiment 3 replicated the findings of Experiment 2: Nonpartisan observers made more accurate judgments when they were accountable than when they were not accountable; however, partisan observers made less accurate judgments when they were accountable than when they were not accountable. Partisans who were not accountable expressed the most confidence in their judgments. Partisans tended to judge their party to be more friendly than the other party; nonpartisans were more evenhanded in their judgments. There were no differences in recall of the videotaped interaction

[1]  Von O. Leirer,et al.  Cognitive representation of personality impressions: Organizational processes in first impression formation. , 1980 .

[2]  James K. Sebenius,et al.  The Manager as Negotiator , 1987 .

[3]  M. D. Storms,et al.  Videotape and the attribution process: reversing actors' and observers' points of view. , 1973, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  L. Ross,et al.  Barriers to conflict resolution , 1995 .

[5]  T. Schelling The Strategy of Conflict , 1963 .

[6]  W. Balke An Alternate Approach to Labor-Management Relations. , 1973 .

[7]  W. Swann,et al.  Dispelling negative expectancies: The impact of interaction goals and target characteristics on the expectancy confirmation process. , 1988 .

[8]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Book Review Nisbett, R. , & Ross, L.Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980. , 1982 .

[9]  L. Thompson Information exchange in negotiation , 1991 .

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

[11]  Terri L. Griffith,et al.  "Fixed Pie" a la Mode: Information Availability, Information Processing, and the Negotiation of Suboptimal Agreements , 1995 .

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

[13]  G. Northcraft,et al.  Experts, amateurs, and refrigerators: Comparing expert and amateur negotiators in a novel task , 1986 .

[14]  S. Oskamp Attitudes toward U.S. and Russian Actions: A Double Standard , 1965, Psychological reports.

[15]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation , 1990 .

[16]  G. Northcraft,et al.  Behavioral negotiation theory : a framework for conceptualizing dyadic bargaining , 1989 .

[17]  L. Ross,et al.  Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence , 1979 .

[18]  H. Cantril,et al.  They saw a game: a case study. , 2011, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[19]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Egocentric Interpretations of Fairness and Interpersonal Conflict , 1992 .

[20]  Mark R. Lepper,et al.  The hostile media phenomenon: biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. , 1985 .

[21]  S. Lichtenstein,et al.  Do those who know more also know more about how much they know?*1 , 1977 .

[22]  Roy F. Baumeister,et al.  Self-Regulation of Cognitive Inference and Decision Processes , 1994 .

[23]  E. E. Jones,et al.  The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. , 1972 .

[24]  D. G. Pruitt,et al.  Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. , 1975 .

[25]  M. Bazerman,et al.  Cognition and Rationality in Negotiation , 1991 .

[26]  John B. Knox,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of Labor Relations. , 1966 .

[27]  J. Greenberg,et al.  Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis-testing model , 1987 .

[28]  D. Mackie,et al.  On-line and memory-based modification of attitudes: determinants of message recall-attitude change correspondence. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[29]  D. Dunning,et al.  Ambiguity and self-evaluation: the role of idiosyncratic trait definitions in self-serving assessments of ability , 1989 .

[30]  Arie W. Kruglanski,et al.  Lay epistemic theory in social-cognitive psychology. , 1990 .

[31]  Constantine Sedikides,et al.  Goals in social information processing: The case of anticipated interaction. , 1989 .

[32]  R. Hastie,et al.  The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment task is memory-based or on-line , 1986 .

[33]  Z. Kunda,et al.  The case for motivated reasoning. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[34]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  The goal of forming accurate impressions during social interactions: attenuating the impact of negative expectancies. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[35]  H. Raiffa The art and science of negotiation , 1983 .

[36]  P. Tetlock The Impact of Accountability on Judgment and Choice: Toward A Social Contingency Model , 1992 .

[37]  L. Thompson,et al.  Social Judgment, Feedback, and Interpersonal Learning in Negotiation , 1994 .

[38]  M. Nicholson The Resolution of Conflict , 1967 .

[39]  J. I. Kim,et al.  Accountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[40]  S. Fiske,et al.  Interpersonal competition can cause individuating processes. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[41]  Arie W. Kruglanski,et al.  The Freezing and Unfreezing of Impressional Primacy , 1985 .

[42]  H. Kelley,et al.  The social psychology of groups , 1960 .

[43]  Linda L. Putnam,et al.  Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction , 1982 .

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

[45]  Kim,et al.  Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement , 1986 .

[46]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  Motivational Influences on Impression Formation: Outcome Dependency, Accuracy-Driven Attention, and Individuating Processes , 1987 .

[47]  E. E. Jones Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior , 1987 .

[48]  Eugene Borgida,et al.  Personal involvement: An examination of processing differences. , 1986 .

[49]  L. Ross,et al.  Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. , 1981 .

[50]  R. Fisher,et al.  Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving in , 1981 .

[51]  S. Fiske,et al.  Outcome Dependency and Attention to Inconsistent Information , 1984 .

[52]  P. Tetlock Accountability: A social check on the fundamental attribution error. , 1985 .

[53]  Peter J. Carnevale,et al.  Negotiation in Social Conflict , 1993 .

[54]  A. Kruglanski Lay epistemo-logic—process and contents: Another look at attribution theory. , 1980 .