Interpretive Filters: Social Cognition and the Impact of Turning Points in Negotiation

A number of studies have shown that certain events that occur during a negotiation can alter its course. Referred to as turning points, these events are precipitated by actions taken either outside or inside the talks, having consequences for outcomes. This article reports the results of two experiments designed to examine the impacts of both types of precipitating actions. Focusing on external actions, the first experiment showed that crises - as opposed to breakthroughs - produced more agreements in the context of positive social climates (high trust, low power). Fewer agreements were achieved in negative social climates (low trust, high power). Focusing on internal actions, the second experiment showed that more cooperative precipitants (factors inducing change) were identified in positive social climates. Outcomes were also influenced by the climate: Positive climates - high trust, cooperate orientations - resulted in more agreements. In both experiments, the social climate mediated the effects of precipitating factors on negotiation outcomes. Perceptions of trust and power filter the way negotiators interpret actions that occur outside or are taken inside a negotiation, leading to agreements or impasses.

[1]  H. Kelley.  The processes of causal attribution. , 1973 .

[2]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Data analysis in social psychology. , 1998 .

[3]  T. Das,et al.  Relational Risk and Its Personal Correlates in Strategic Alliances , 2001 .

[4]  D. Kolb.  Staying in the Game or Changing It: An Analysis of Moves and Turns in Negotiation , 2004 .

[5]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  Understanding Optimal Outcomes: The Role of Strategy Sequences in Competitive Negotiations. , 2000 .

[6]  William A. Donohue.  Critical Moments as “Flow” in Negotiation , 2004 .

[7]  D. Moskowitz,et al.  Situational influences on gender differences in agency and communion. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Mark T. Palmer,et al.  Relational Judgments in an Influence Context. , 1995 .

[9]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Social motives and trust in integrative negotiation : The disruptive effects of punitive capability , 1998 .

[10]  Elizabeth Newton,et al.  Self-Enhancement Biases and Negotiator Judgment: Effects of Self-Esteem and Mood , 1993 .

[11]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Departures in Negotiation: Extensions and New Directions , 2004 .

[12]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Turning Points in International Negotiation , 2001 .

[13]  Misperceiving negotiation counterparts : When situationally determined bargaining behaviors are attributed to personality traits , 1999 .

[14]  John K. Butler.  Trust Expectations, Information Sharing, Climate of Trust, and Negotiation Effectiveness and Efficiency , 1999 .

[15]  Peter T. Coleman,et al.  The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice , 2000 .

[16]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  Spirals of Trust: Identifying the Factors that Shape and Sustain Trust in Negotiation , 2002 .

[17]  D. Druckman,et al.  Turning points in the INF negotiations , 1991 .

[18]  Kathleen L. McGinn,et al.  Transitions through Out‐of‐Keeping Acts , 2004 .

[19]  L. Weingart,et al.  Emergent Negotiations: Stability and Shifts in Process Dynamics , 2008 .

[20]  I. W. Zartman,et al.  Ripeness: The hurting stalemate and beyond , 2000 .

[21]  B. Beersma,et al.  NEGOTIATION PROCESSES AND OUTCOMES IN PROSOCIALLY AND EGOISTICALLY MOTIVATED GROUPS , 1999 .

[22]  C. Johnson-George,et al.  Measurement of specific interpersonal trust: Construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other. , 1982 .

[23]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[24]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Stages, Turning Points, and Crises , 1986 .

[25]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[26]  L. Weingart,et al.  PHASES, TRANSITIONS AND INTERRUPTIONS: MODELING PROCESSES IN MULTI‐PARTY NEGOTIATIONS , 2003 .

[27]  Thomas D. Cook,et al.  Post-positivist critical multiplism , 1985 .

[28]  D. Hilton,et al.  Processes of causal explanation and dispositional attribution. , 1995 .

[29]  Loose with the Truth: Predicting Deception in Negotiation , 2007 .

[30]  L. Weingart,et al.  Emergent Negotiations: Stability and Shifts in Negotiation Dynamics , 2008 .

[31]  Wendi L. Adair,et al.  Negotiation behavior when cultures collide: the United States and Japan. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[32]  Mara Olekalns,et al.  Moments in Time: Metacognition, Trust, and Outcomes in Dyadic Negotiations , 2005, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[33]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Boundary Role Conflict , 1977 .

[34]  W. Mischel,et al.  A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. , 1995, Psychological review.

[35]  Francis J. Flynn.  Identity Orientations And Forms Of Social Exchange In Organizations , 2005 .

[36]  Leigh Thompson,et al.  The bittersweet feeling of success: An examination of social perception in negotiation. , 1995 .

[37]  N. L. Chervany,et al.  Initial Trust Formation in New Organizational Relationships , 1998 .

[38]  S. Robinson.  Trust and Breach of the Psychological Contract , 1996 .