权力差异和社会动机对谈判行为和结果的影响
|
摘要
如何达成高质量整合性结果(双赢)是谈判研究的一个核心问题。权力差异和社会动机是影响谈判整合性结果的两个重要因素。本研究结合“权力产生抽象认知表征的假设”和“动机推动的信息加工模型”两种理论观点,认为权力差异和社会动机共同影响谈判的行为和结果。我们采用两种谈判任务和几种不同的权力及社会动机操控方式,运用模拟实验方法,探讨了权力差异和社会动机对谈判认知、谈判行为以及谈判结果的影响。研究共分三个部分。
研究一关注权力平等(双方权力都大、双方权力都小和控制组)和权力不平等条件下不同社会动机对谈判行为和谈判结果的影响。结果表明,总体上,权力不平等的谈判比权力平等的谈判获得了更多的联合收益。谈判双方权力都大和权力不平等的谈判均比双方权力都小的谈判得到更多的联合收益。社会动机对谈判行为有显著的影响,具有亲社会动机的谈判者比利己动机的谈判者更多的采用问题解决的谈判策略。权力差异和社会动机在谈判策略上存在交互作用。
研究二关注不同角色(权力)谈判者的社会动机对谈判行为和结果的影响。结果表明,权力差异和社会动机对谈判联合收益的影响具有交互作用。人事经理的社会动机比应聘者的社会动机对谈判的整合结果影响更大,人事经理单独具有亲社会动机比双方社会动机都控制的谈判联合收益更多。并且,回归分析表明,人事经理的社会动机对谈判整合结果的影响不依赖于人事经理的抱负水平和积极情绪的作用。对谈判行为的编码分析发现人事经理单独具有亲社会动机的谈判组比双方社会动机都控制的谈判组采用更多的整合式谈判策略。
研究三进一步探讨不同角色(权力)谈判者的社会动机在不同求知动机条件下对谈判认知、行为和结果的影响。结果表明,对双方都具有亲社会动机的谈判来说,在高求知动机的条件下(赋予解释责任)比低求知动机条件下,谈判获得了更多的联合收益,表现出最多的问题解决行为。权力和求知动机在个体水平上对固定馅饼知觉没有影响,但包含亲社会人事经理的谈判组整体的固定馅饼知觉偏差较小。
最后,研究者讨论了结果验证假设的情况,提出了一个关于整合式谈判的理论新理论。
How to reach agreements of high joint outcomes is the focus of negotiation researchers. Power imbalance and social motives are very important variables that influence integrative negotiations. On the basis of "The Abstract Hypothesis" of power and "A Motivated Information-processing Model" of negotiation, the authors suggest that it is important to consider the interactive effects of power difference and social motive on negotiation processes and outcomes. Three laboratory simulation experiments were designed in this paper to explore these effects by using two classic negotiation tasks and several different manipulations of power and social motive.
In the first experiment, the differences of negotiation behavior and outcomes between negotiators with an equal balance of power (high-high, low-low, no-no) and negotiators with an unequal power balance were tested when they had a prosocial or proself motivation. The results showed that negotiators with unequal power reached agreements of higher joint gain than that of negotiators with equal power. Both unequal power dyads and high-high power dyads obtained higher joint benefit than low-low power dyads. Social motives significantly influenced the negotiator behavior. Those who prosocially motivated negotiators engaged in more problem solving than those who egoistically motivated negotiators. Moreover, there were significant interactive effects of power difference and social motive on negotiation behavior.
In the second experiment, we proposed that the role and social motive had interactive effects on negotiation processes and outcomes. Results partially supported our hypothesis. The prosocial motivation of recruiters shaped the quality of negotiation processes and outcomes more than the prosocial motivation of candidates. Pairs consisting of one prosocial recruiter and one candidate received no instructions about social motive reached higher joint outcomes and engaged in more problem solving than pairs consisting of two parties both received no instructions about social motive. Furthermore, results of multiple regression analysis indicated that recruiters' social motives significantly predicted the integrativeness of negotiation agreements, even after controlling for recruiters' aspirations and recruiters' positive affects which had been considered to have effect on joint outcomes in previous researches.
Basing on the second experiment, the authors added epistemic motivation (manipulated by holding negotiators process accountability or not) as an independent variable and measured fixed-pie perceptions as another dependent variable in the third experiment. The results indicated that dyads consisting of two prosocial negotiators achieved higher joint outcomes and engaged in more problem solving when their epistemic motivation was high rather than low. Although there was neither main effect of power (role) nor main effect of epistemic motivation on fixed-pie perceptions for individual-level outcomes, dyads including one prosocial recruiter held less fixed-pie perceptions than dyads including one proself recruiter for dyad-level outcomes.
Finally, a new theory of integrative negotiation theory was proposed after general discussion.
研究一关注权力平等(双方权力都大、双方权力都小和控制组)和权力不平等条件下不同社会动机对谈判行为和谈判结果的影响。结果表明,总体上,权力不平等的谈判比权力平等的谈判获得了更多的联合收益。谈判双方权力都大和权力不平等的谈判均比双方权力都小的谈判得到更多的联合收益。社会动机对谈判行为有显著的影响,具有亲社会动机的谈判者比利己动机的谈判者更多的采用问题解决的谈判策略。权力差异和社会动机在谈判策略上存在交互作用。
研究二关注不同角色(权力)谈判者的社会动机对谈判行为和结果的影响。结果表明,权力差异和社会动机对谈判联合收益的影响具有交互作用。人事经理的社会动机比应聘者的社会动机对谈判的整合结果影响更大,人事经理单独具有亲社会动机比双方社会动机都控制的谈判联合收益更多。并且,回归分析表明,人事经理的社会动机对谈判整合结果的影响不依赖于人事经理的抱负水平和积极情绪的作用。对谈判行为的编码分析发现人事经理单独具有亲社会动机的谈判组比双方社会动机都控制的谈判组采用更多的整合式谈判策略。
研究三进一步探讨不同角色(权力)谈判者的社会动机在不同求知动机条件下对谈判认知、行为和结果的影响。结果表明,对双方都具有亲社会动机的谈判来说,在高求知动机的条件下(赋予解释责任)比低求知动机条件下,谈判获得了更多的联合收益,表现出最多的问题解决行为。权力和求知动机在个体水平上对固定馅饼知觉没有影响,但包含亲社会人事经理的谈判组整体的固定馅饼知觉偏差较小。
最后,研究者讨论了结果验证假设的情况,提出了一个关于整合式谈判的理论新理论。
How to reach agreements of high joint outcomes is the focus of negotiation researchers. Power imbalance and social motives are very important variables that influence integrative negotiations. On the basis of "The Abstract Hypothesis" of power and "A Motivated Information-processing Model" of negotiation, the authors suggest that it is important to consider the interactive effects of power difference and social motive on negotiation processes and outcomes. Three laboratory simulation experiments were designed in this paper to explore these effects by using two classic negotiation tasks and several different manipulations of power and social motive.
In the first experiment, the differences of negotiation behavior and outcomes between negotiators with an equal balance of power (high-high, low-low, no-no) and negotiators with an unequal power balance were tested when they had a prosocial or proself motivation. The results showed that negotiators with unequal power reached agreements of higher joint gain than that of negotiators with equal power. Both unequal power dyads and high-high power dyads obtained higher joint benefit than low-low power dyads. Social motives significantly influenced the negotiator behavior. Those who prosocially motivated negotiators engaged in more problem solving than those who egoistically motivated negotiators. Moreover, there were significant interactive effects of power difference and social motive on negotiation behavior.
In the second experiment, we proposed that the role and social motive had interactive effects on negotiation processes and outcomes. Results partially supported our hypothesis. The prosocial motivation of recruiters shaped the quality of negotiation processes and outcomes more than the prosocial motivation of candidates. Pairs consisting of one prosocial recruiter and one candidate received no instructions about social motive reached higher joint outcomes and engaged in more problem solving than pairs consisting of two parties both received no instructions about social motive. Furthermore, results of multiple regression analysis indicated that recruiters' social motives significantly predicted the integrativeness of negotiation agreements, even after controlling for recruiters' aspirations and recruiters' positive affects which had been considered to have effect on joint outcomes in previous researches.
Basing on the second experiment, the authors added epistemic motivation (manipulated by holding negotiators process accountability or not) as an independent variable and measured fixed-pie perceptions as another dependent variable in the third experiment. The results indicated that dyads consisting of two prosocial negotiators achieved higher joint outcomes and engaged in more problem solving when their epistemic motivation was high rather than low. Although there was neither main effect of power (role) nor main effect of epistemic motivation on fixed-pie perceptions for individual-level outcomes, dyads including one prosocial recruiter held less fixed-pie perceptions than dyads including one proself recruiter for dyad-level outcomes.
Finally, a new theory of integrative negotiation theory was proposed after general discussion.
引文
陈欣,叶浩生.两难中合作行为研究的回顾和展望.心理科学进展,2007,15(5):743-748
丰琳,马剑虹.资源两难问题的研究及其新进展.心理科学进展,2003,11(3):345-349
何贵兵.动态两难对策中信息反馈方式对合作行为的影响.心理科学,2004,27(4):876-880
李岩梅,刘长江,李纾.认知、动机、情感因素对谈判行为的影响.心理科学进展,2007,15(3):511-517
马剑虹,刘满霞.社会两难行为理性特点的实验分析.心理科学,2006,29(2):290-293
邱林,郑雪,严标宾.谈判心理研究发展述评.心理科学进展,2003,11(2):235-239
韦庆旺,郑全全.权力对谈判的影响研究综述.人类工效学,2008,14(2):57-59
谢晓非,余媛媛,陈曦,陈晓萍.合作与竞争人格倾向测量.心理学报,2006,38(1):116-125
徐光国,王重鸣.谈判研究的理论框架及其应用.心理学动态,1997,5(3):63-68
严进,王重鸣.群体任务中合作行为的跨阶段演变.心理学报,2003,35(4):499-503
严进,王重鸣.两难情景下任务结构与价值取向的效用特征转换.心理学报,2002,34(5):529-533
严进,王重鸣.两难对策中价值取向对群体合作行为的影响.心理学报,2000,32(3):332-336
张真,皇甫刚.影响整合式谈判的情境因素和过程因素.心理科学进展,2007,15(3):518-523
张志学,王敏,韩玉兰.谈判者的参照点和换位思考对谈判过程和谈判结果的影响.管理世界,2006,(1):83-95
张志学,韩玉兰.回报谨慎对谈判过程和谈判结果的影响.心理学报,2004,36(3):370-377
郑全全,朱华燕,胡凌雁等.群体决策过程中的信息取样偏差.心理学报,2001,33(1):68-74
郑全全,朱华燕.自由讨论条件下群体决策质量的影响因素.心理学报,2001,33(3):264-269
朱华燕,郑全全.MAU程序和自由讨论的群体决策质量比较.心理学报,2001,33(6):552-557
Adair W L,Brett J M.The Negotiation Dance:Time,Culture,and Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation.Organizational Science,2005,16(1):33-51
Adair W L,Okumura T,Brett J M.Negotiation Behavior When Cultures Collide:The United States and Japan.Journal of Applied Psychology,2001,86(3):371-385
Adair W L,Weingart L,Brett J M.The Timing and Function of Offers in U.S.and Japanese Negotiations.Journal of Applied Psychology,2007,92(4):1056-1068
Anderson C,Thompson L L.Affect from the Top Down:How Powerful Individuals'Positive Affect Shapes Negotiations.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2004,95(2):125-139
Allred K G,Mallozzi J S,Matsui F,et al.The Influence of Anger and Compassion on Negotiation Performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1997, 70: 175-187
Babcock L, Loewenstein G. Explaining Bargaining Impasses: The Role of Self-serving Biases. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1997, 11(1): 109-126
Bargh J A, Chartrand T L. The Unbearable Automaticity of Being. American Psychologist, 1999,54:462-479
Bazerman M H, Curhan J R. Bounded Awareness: Focusing Failures in Negotiation, in: Thompson L, Ed. Negotiation Theory and Research. New York: Psychology Press, 2006. 7-26
Bazerman M H, Curhan J R, Moore D A, et al. Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 2000,51:279-314
Bazerman M H, Magliozzi T, Neale M A. Integrative Bargaining in Competitive Market. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1985, 35(3): 294-313
Bazerman M H, Neale M A. Improving Negotiation Effectiveness under Final Offer Arbitration: The Role of Selection and Training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1982, 67(5): 543-548
Bazerman M H, Neale M A. Heuristics in Negotiation: Limitations to Dispute Resolution Effectiveness, in: Bazerman M H, Lewicki R J, Eds. Negotiating in Organizations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1983.51-67
Beersma B, De Dreu C K W. Negotiation Processes and Outcomes in Prosocially and Egoistically Motivated Groups. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1999, 10: 385-402
Beersma B, De Dreu C K W. Integrative and Distributive Negotiation in Small Groups: Effects of Task Structure, Decision Rule, and Social Motive. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2002, 87: 217-252
Ben-Yoav O, Pruitt D G. Resistance to Yielding and the Expectation of Cooperative Future Interaction in Negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1984, 20: 323-335
Bottom W P, Studt A. Framing Effects and the Distributive Aspect of Integrative Bargaining. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1993, 56(3): 459-474
Brett J M. Culture and negotiation. International Journal of Psychology, 2000, 35(2): 97-104
Brett J M, Okumura T. Inter- and Intra-cultural Negotiation: U.S. and Japanese Negotiations. Academy of Management Journal, 1998, 41(5): 371-384
Bulter J K. Conflict Styles and Outcomes in a Negotiation with Fully-integrative Potential. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1994, 5: 309-325
Burnham T, McCabe K, Smith V L. Friend-or-foe Intentionality Priming in an Extensive Form Trust Game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 2000, 43: 57-73
Carnevale P J, De Dreu C K W. Motive: The Negotiator's Raison d'Etre. in: Thompson L, Ed. Negotiation Theory and Research. New York: Psychology Press, 2006. 55-79
Carnevale P J, Lawler E J. Time Pressure and the Development of Integrative Agreements in Bilateral Negotiation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1986, 30: 636-659
Carroll J S, Bazerman M H, Maury R. Negotiator Cognitions: A Descriptive Approach to Negotiator's Understanding of Their Opponents. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1988, 41(3): 352-370
Carver C S, Sutton S K, Scheier M F. Action, Emotion, and Personality: Emerging Conceptual Integration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2000, 26: 741-751
Chaiken S, Liberman A, Eagly A H. Heuristic and Systematic Processing within and beyond the Persuasion Context. in: Uleman J S, Bargh J A, Eds. Unintended thought. New York: Guilford, 1989.212 252
Chen S, Lee-Chai A Y, Bargh J A. Relationship Orientation as a Moderator of the Effects of Social Power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 80: 173-187
Curhan J R, Elfenbein H A, Xu H. What Do People Value When They Negotiate? Mapping the Domain of Subjective Value in Negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006. 91(3): 493-512
De Dreu C K W. Coercive Power and Concession Making in Bilateral Negotiation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1995, 39(4): 646-670
De Dreu C K W. Time Pressure and Closing of the Mind in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2003, 91: 280-295
De Dreu C K W, Beersma B, Stroebe K, et al. Motivated Information Processing, Strategic Choice, and the Quality of Negotiated Agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, 90(6): 927-943
De Dreu C K W, Boles T. Share and Share Alike or Winner Take All? Impact of Social Value Orientation on the Choice and Recall of Decision Heuristics in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1998, 76: 253-267
De Dreu C K W, Carnevale P J. Motivational Bases for Information Processing and Strategic Choice in Conflict and Negotiation. in: Zanna M P, Ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol.35. New York: Academic Press, 2003.235-291
De Dreu C K W, Evers A, Beersma B, et al. A Theory-based Measure of Conflict Management Strategies in the Workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2001, 22: 645-668
De Dreu C K W, Koole S, Oldersma F L. On the Seizing and Freezing of Negotiator Inferences: Need for Cognitive Closure Moderates the Use of Heuristics in Negotiation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1999,25: 348-362
De Dreu C K W, Koole S, Steinel W. Unfixing the Fixed-pie: A Motivated Information Processing of Integrative Negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000b, 79: 975-987
De Dreu C K W, McCusker C. Gain-loss Frames and Cooperation in Two-person Social Dilemmas: A Transformational Analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997, 72(5): 1093-1106
De Dreu C K W, Van Kleef G A. The Influence of Power on the Information Search, Impression Formation, and Demands in Negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2004, 40(3): 303-319
De Dreu C K W, Weingart L R, Kwon S. Influence of Social Motives on Integrative Negotiation: A Meta-analytical Review and Test of Two Theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000a, 78: 889-905
Deutsh M. A Theory of Cooperation and Competition. Human Relations, 1949, 2: 199-231
Devine P G. Stereotypes and Prejudice: Their Automatic and Controlled Components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1989, 56: 5-18
Diekmann K A, Samuels S M, Ross L, et al. Self-interest and Fairness in Problems of Resource Allocation: Allocators versus Recipients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997,72(5): 1061-1074
Diekmann K A, Tenbrunsel A E, Ahah P P, et al. The Descriptive and Prescriptive Use of Previous Purchase Price in Negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1996, 66(2): 179-191
Ebenbach D H, Keltner D. Power, Emotion and Judgmental Accuracy in Social Conflict: Motivating the Cognitive Miser. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1998, 20: 7-21
Emerson R M. Power Dependence Relations. American Sociological Review, 1962, 27: 31-41
Fazio R H, Sanbonmatsu D M, Powell M C, et al. On the Automatic Activation of Attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 50: 229-238 1986
Fisher Fisher R, Ury W. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in. Houghton- Mifflin: Boston, MA, 1981
Fiske S T. Controlling Other People: The Impact of Power on Stereotyping. American Psychologist, 1993, 48(6): 621-628
Fiske S T, Neuberg S L. A Continuum Model of Impression Formation, from Category-based to Individuating Processes: Influence of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation, in: Zanna M P, Ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol.23. New York: Academic Press, 1990. 1-74
French J, Raven B. The Bases of Social Power, in Cartwright D, Ed. Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, 1959. 150-167
Fry W R, Firestone I J, Williams D L. Negotiation Process and Outcome of Stranger Dyads and Dating Couples: Do Lovers Lose? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1984, 4: 1-16
Galinsky A D, Gruenfeld D H, Magee J C. From Power to Action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2003, 85(3): 453-466
Galinsky A D, Mussweiler T. First Offers as Anchors: The Role of Perspective-taking and Negotiation Focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 81: 657-669
Gelfand M J, Cai D A. The Cultural Structuring of the Social Context of Negotiation, in: Gelfand M J, Brett J M, Eds. Handbook of Negotiation: Theoretical Advances and Cultural Perspectives. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004. 238-257
Gelfand M J, Christakopoulou S. Culture and Negotiator Cognition: Judgment Accuracy and Negotiation Processes in Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1999, 79(3): 248-269
Gelfand M J, Nishii L H, Holcombe K M, et al. Cultural Influences on Cognitive Representations of Conflict: Interpretations of Conflict Episodes in the United States and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2001, 86(6): 1059-1074
Gelfand M J, Realo A. 1999 Individualism-Collectivism and Accountability in Intergroup Negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1999, 84(5): 721-736
Gilbert D T. Ordinary Personology. in: Gilbert D, Fisk S T, Lindzey G, Eds. Handbook of Social Psychology. 4th ed. Vol.2. New York: Academic Press, 1998. 89-150
Gilbert D T, Krull D S, Pelham B W. Of Thoughts Unspoken: Social Inference and the Self-regulation of Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, 55: 685-694
Goodwin S A, Gubin A, Fiske S, Yzerbyt V Y. Power Can Bias Impression Processes: Stereotyping Subordinates by Default and by Design. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 2000,3:227-256
Hall J A, Rosip J C, Le Beau L S, et al. Attributing the Sources of Accuracy in Unequal-power Dyadic Communication: Who is Better and Why? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2006, 42(1): 18-27
Henderson M D, Trope Y, Carnevale P J. Negotiation from a Near and Distant Time Perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, 91(4): 712-729
Higgins E T. Beyond Pleasure and Pain. American Psychologist, 1997, 52: 1280-1300
Howard E S, Gardner W L, Thompson L. The Role of the Self-Concept and the Social Context in Determining the Behavior of Power Holders: Self-Construal in Intergroup Versus Dyadic Dispute Resolution Negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007, 93(6): 614-631
Idson L C, Chugh D, Bereby-Meyer Y, et al. Overcoming Focusing Failures in Competitive Environments. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2004, 17: 159-172
Kahneman D. Reference Points, Anchors, Norms, and Mixed Feelings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1992, 51(2): 296-312
Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica, 1979,47: 263-291
Kelley H H, Beckman L L, Fischer C S. Negotiation the Division of Reward under Incomplete Information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1967,3:361-389
Keltner D, Gruenfeld D H, Anderson C. Power, Approach, and Inhibition. Psychological Review, 2003,110(2): 265-284
Keltner D, Robinson R J. Imagined Ideological Differences in Conflict Escalation and Resolution. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1993, 4(3): 249-262
Keltner D, Robinson R J. Defending the Status Quo: Power and Bias in Social Conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1997,23:1066-1077
Kim P H, Fragale A R. Choosing the Path to Bargaining Power: An Empirical Comparison of BATNAs and Contributions in Negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2005, 90(2): 373-381
Kim P H, Pinkley R L, Fragale A R. Power Dynamics in Negotiation. Academy of Management Review, 2005, 30(4): 799-822
Kim P H. Strategic Timing in Group Negotiations: The Implications of Forced Entry and Forced Exit for Negotiators with Unequal Power. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1997, 71: 263-286
Kipnis D, Schmidt S M, Wilkinson I. Intraorganizational Influence Tactics: Explorations in Getting One's Way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1980, 65: 440-452
Kramer R M, Newton E, Pommerenke P L. Self-enhancement Biases and Negotiator Judgment: Effects of Self-esteem and Mood. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1993,56(1): 110-133
Kruglanski A W. The Psychology of Being "Right": The Problem of Accuracy in Social Perception and Cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 1989, 106(2): 395-409
Kruglanski A W, Webster D M. Motivational Closing of the Mind: "Seizing" and "Freezing". Psychological Review, 1996, 103: 263-283
Kuhlman D M, Marshello A. Individual Differences in Game Motivation as Moderators of Preprogrammed Strategy Effects in Prisoner's Dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32: 922-931
Lerner J S, Tetlock P E. Accounting for the Effects of Accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 1999, 125(2): 255-275
Lim R G, Carnevale P J. Influencing Mediator Behavior through Bargainer Framing. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1995, 6(4): 349-368
Lim R G. Overconfidence in Negotiation Revisited. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1997, 8(1): 52-79
Magee J C, Galinsky A D, Gruenfeld D H. Power, Propensity to Negotiate, and Moving First in Competitive Interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2007, 33(2): 200-212
Mannix E A. The Influence of Power, Distribution Norms and Task Meeting Structure on Resource Allocation in Small Group Negotiation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1993,4:5-23
Mannix E A, Neale M A. Power Imbalance and Pattern of Exchange in Dyadic Negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1993, 2(2): 119-133
Mannix E A, Thompson L L, Bazerman M H. Negotiation in Small Groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1989, 74: 508-517
Moore D A, Kurtzberg T R, Thompson L, et al. Long and Short Routes to Success in Electronically Mediated Negotiations: Group Affiliations and Good Vibrations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1999, 77(1): 22-43
Naquin C E, Paulson G D. Online Bargaining and Interpersonal Trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(1): 113-120
Neale M A. The Effects of Negotiation and Arbitration Cost Salience on Bargainer Behavior: The Role of the Arbitrator and Constituency on Negotiator Judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1984, 34(1): 97-111
Neale M A. New Recruit, in: Brett J M, Ed. Teaching Materials for Negotiations and Decision Making. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University, Dispute Resolution Research Center. 1997
Neale M A, Bazerman M H. Cognition and Rationality in Negotiation. New York: Free Press, 1991
Ng S H. The Social Psychology of Power. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1980
Northcraft G B, Neale M A. Experts, Amateurs, and Real Estate: An Anchoring-and-adjustment Perspective on Property Pricing Decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1987, 39(1): 84-97
O'Connor K M, Carnevale P J. A Nasty but Effective Negotiation Strategy: Misrepresentaion of a Common-value Issue. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1997, 23:504-515
Olekalns M. Situational Cues as Moderators of the Frame-outcome Relationship. British Journal of Social Psychology, 1997, 36(2): 191-209
Olekalns M, Smith P L. Testing the Relationships among Negotiators' Motivational Orientations, Strategy Choices and Outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003, 39: 101-117
Overbeck J R, Park B. Powerful Perceivers, Powerless Objects: Flexibility of Powerholders' Social Attention. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2006, 99: 227-243
Overbeck J R, Park B. When Power Does not Corrupt: Superior Individuation Processes among Powerful Perceivers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 81: 549-565
Pinkley R L, Griffith T L, Northcraft G B. Fixed Pie a la Mode: Information Availability, Information Processing, and the Negation of Suboptimal Agreements. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1995, 62(1): 101-112
Pinkley R L, Neale M A, Bennett R J, et al. The Impact of Alternatives to Settlement in Dyadic Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1994, 57(1): 97-116
Polzer J T. Intergroup Negotiations: The Effects of Negotiating Teams. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1996,40: 678-698
Polzer J T, Mannix E A, Neale M A. Interest Alignment and Coalitions in Multi Party Negotiation. Academic Management Journal, 1998, 41: 42-54
Pruitt, D G, Lewis, S A. Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31: 621-633
Pruitt D G, Rubin J Z. Social Conflict: Escalation, Statemate, and Settlement. New York: Random House, 1986
Pruitt D G. Social Conflict, in: Gilbert D, Fisk S T, Lindzey Q, Eds. Handbook of Social Psychology. 4th ed. Vol.2. New York: Academic Press, 1998. 89-150
Purdy J M, Nye P. The Impact of Communication Media on Negotiation Outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 2000,11(2): 162-187
Raiffa H. The Art and Science of Negotiation. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 1982
Ritov I. Anchoring in Simulated Competitive Market Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1996,67(1): 16-25
Rolls E T. The Orbitofrontal Cortex and Reward. Cerebral Cortex, 2000,10: 284-294
Ross L, Stillinger C. Barriers to Conflict Resolution. Negotiation Journal, 1991, 7(4): 389-404
Rubin J, Pruitt D G, Kim S. Social Conflict: Escalation, Statemate, and Settlement. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994
Russell B. Power: A New Social Analysis. London: Allen and Unwin, 1938
Schwarz N, Clore G L. Feelings and Phenomenal Experiences, in Higgins E T, Kruglanski A W, Eds. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic PrinciplesNew York: Guilford Press, 1996. 433-465
Smith P K, Trope Y. You Focus on the Forest When You're in Charge of the Trees: Power Priming and Abstract Information Processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, 90(4): 578-596
Snodgrass S E. Further Effects of Role versus Gender on Interpersonal Sensitivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1992, 62: 154-158
Sondak H, Bazerman M H. Power Balance and the Rationality of Outcomes in Matching Markets. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1991, 50(1): 1-23
Stapel D A, Koomen W. I, We, and the Effects of Others on Me: How Self-Construal Level Moderates Social Comparison Effects. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 80: 766-781
Stevens L E, Fiske S T. Motivated Impressions of a Power holder: Accuracy under Task Dependency and Misperception under Evaluation Dependency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2000, 26: 907-922
Thompson L. Negotiation Behavior and Outcomes: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Issues. Psychological Bulletin, 1990, 108: 515-532
Thompson L. The Impact of Minimum Goals and Aspirations on Judgments of Success in Negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1995, 4(6): 513-524
Thompson L. The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator. 2nd. New York: Prentice Hall, 2004
Thompson L, Ed. Negotiation Theory and Research. New York: Psychology Press, 2006
Thompson L, DeHarpport T. Social Judgment, Feedback, and Interpersonal Learning in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1994, 58(3): 327-345
Thompson L, Hastie R. Social Perception in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1990,47(1): 98-123
Thompson L, Hrebec D. Lose-lose Agreements in Interdependent Decision Making. Psychological Bulletin, 1996, 120(3): 396-409
Thompson L, Mannix E A, Bazerman M H. Group Negotiation: Effects of Decision Rule, Agenda, and Aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, 54: 86-95
Tor A, Bazerman M H. Focusing Failures in Competitive Environments: Explaining Decision Errors in the Monty Hall Game, the Acquiring a Company Problem, and Multiparty Ultimatums. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2003, 16(5): 353-374
Trope Y, Liberman N. Temporal Construal. Psychological Review, 2003, 110: 403-421
Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 1974, 185: 1124-1131
Ulijn, J M, Lincke A. The Effect of CMC and FTF on Negotiation Outcomes between R&D and Manufacturing Partners in the Supply Chain: An Anglo/Nordic/Latin Comparison. International Negotiation, 2004,9: 111-140
Valley K L, Moag J, Bazerman M H. A Matter of Trust: Effects of Communication on the Efficiency and Distribution of Outcomes. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1998, 34(2): 211-238
Van de Vliert E. Positive Effects of Conflict: A Field Assessment. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1990, 1: 69-80
Van de Vliert E. Complex interpersonal conflict behavior. London: Psychology Press, 1997
Van Kleef G A, De Dreu C K W, Pietroni D, et al. Power and Emotion in Negotiation: Power Moderates the Interpersonal Effects of Anger and Happiness on Concession Making. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2006, 36(4): 557-581
Van Kleef G A, De Dreu C K W, Manstead A S R. The Interpersonal Effects of Emotions in Negotiations: A Motivated Information Processing Approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2004, 87: 510-528
Van Lange P A. The Pursuit of Joint Outcomes and Equality in Outcomes: An Integrative Model of Social Value Orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999, 77: 337-349
Wegner D M, Bargh J A. Control and Automaticity in Social Life, in: Gilbert D, Fiske S T, Lindzey G, Eds. Handbook of Social Psychology. 4th ed. Vol.2. New York: Academic Press, 1998. 446-496
Weingart L R, Brett J M, Olekalns M, et al. Conflicting Social Motives in Negotiating Groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007, 93(6): 994-1010
Weingart L R, Bennett R J, Brett J M. The Impact of Consideration of Issues and Motivational Orientation on Group Negotiation Process and Outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993, 78: 504-517
Weingart L R, Hyder E, Prietula M J. Knowledge Matters: The Effect of Tactical Descriptions on Negotiation Behavior and Outcome. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, 70: 1205-1217
Wolfe R J, McGinn K L. Perceived Relative Power and its Influence on Negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2005, 14(1): 3-20
Woike B A. The Use of Differentiation and Integration Processes: Empirical Studies of "Separate" and "Connected" Ways of Thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1994,67: 142-150
丰琳,马剑虹.资源两难问题的研究及其新进展.心理科学进展,2003,11(3):345-349
何贵兵.动态两难对策中信息反馈方式对合作行为的影响.心理科学,2004,27(4):876-880
李岩梅,刘长江,李纾.认知、动机、情感因素对谈判行为的影响.心理科学进展,2007,15(3):511-517
马剑虹,刘满霞.社会两难行为理性特点的实验分析.心理科学,2006,29(2):290-293
邱林,郑雪,严标宾.谈判心理研究发展述评.心理科学进展,2003,11(2):235-239
韦庆旺,郑全全.权力对谈判的影响研究综述.人类工效学,2008,14(2):57-59
谢晓非,余媛媛,陈曦,陈晓萍.合作与竞争人格倾向测量.心理学报,2006,38(1):116-125
徐光国,王重鸣.谈判研究的理论框架及其应用.心理学动态,1997,5(3):63-68
严进,王重鸣.群体任务中合作行为的跨阶段演变.心理学报,2003,35(4):499-503
严进,王重鸣.两难情景下任务结构与价值取向的效用特征转换.心理学报,2002,34(5):529-533
严进,王重鸣.两难对策中价值取向对群体合作行为的影响.心理学报,2000,32(3):332-336
张真,皇甫刚.影响整合式谈判的情境因素和过程因素.心理科学进展,2007,15(3):518-523
张志学,王敏,韩玉兰.谈判者的参照点和换位思考对谈判过程和谈判结果的影响.管理世界,2006,(1):83-95
张志学,韩玉兰.回报谨慎对谈判过程和谈判结果的影响.心理学报,2004,36(3):370-377
郑全全,朱华燕,胡凌雁等.群体决策过程中的信息取样偏差.心理学报,2001,33(1):68-74
郑全全,朱华燕.自由讨论条件下群体决策质量的影响因素.心理学报,2001,33(3):264-269
朱华燕,郑全全.MAU程序和自由讨论的群体决策质量比较.心理学报,2001,33(6):552-557
Adair W L,Brett J M.The Negotiation Dance:Time,Culture,and Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation.Organizational Science,2005,16(1):33-51
Adair W L,Okumura T,Brett J M.Negotiation Behavior When Cultures Collide:The United States and Japan.Journal of Applied Psychology,2001,86(3):371-385
Adair W L,Weingart L,Brett J M.The Timing and Function of Offers in U.S.and Japanese Negotiations.Journal of Applied Psychology,2007,92(4):1056-1068
Anderson C,Thompson L L.Affect from the Top Down:How Powerful Individuals'Positive Affect Shapes Negotiations.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2004,95(2):125-139
Allred K G,Mallozzi J S,Matsui F,et al.The Influence of Anger and Compassion on Negotiation Performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1997, 70: 175-187
Babcock L, Loewenstein G. Explaining Bargaining Impasses: The Role of Self-serving Biases. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1997, 11(1): 109-126
Bargh J A, Chartrand T L. The Unbearable Automaticity of Being. American Psychologist, 1999,54:462-479
Bazerman M H, Curhan J R. Bounded Awareness: Focusing Failures in Negotiation, in: Thompson L, Ed. Negotiation Theory and Research. New York: Psychology Press, 2006. 7-26
Bazerman M H, Curhan J R, Moore D A, et al. Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 2000,51:279-314
Bazerman M H, Magliozzi T, Neale M A. Integrative Bargaining in Competitive Market. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1985, 35(3): 294-313
Bazerman M H, Neale M A. Improving Negotiation Effectiveness under Final Offer Arbitration: The Role of Selection and Training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1982, 67(5): 543-548
Bazerman M H, Neale M A. Heuristics in Negotiation: Limitations to Dispute Resolution Effectiveness, in: Bazerman M H, Lewicki R J, Eds. Negotiating in Organizations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1983.51-67
Beersma B, De Dreu C K W. Negotiation Processes and Outcomes in Prosocially and Egoistically Motivated Groups. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1999, 10: 385-402
Beersma B, De Dreu C K W. Integrative and Distributive Negotiation in Small Groups: Effects of Task Structure, Decision Rule, and Social Motive. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2002, 87: 217-252
Ben-Yoav O, Pruitt D G. Resistance to Yielding and the Expectation of Cooperative Future Interaction in Negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1984, 20: 323-335
Bottom W P, Studt A. Framing Effects and the Distributive Aspect of Integrative Bargaining. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1993, 56(3): 459-474
Brett J M. Culture and negotiation. International Journal of Psychology, 2000, 35(2): 97-104
Brett J M, Okumura T. Inter- and Intra-cultural Negotiation: U.S. and Japanese Negotiations. Academy of Management Journal, 1998, 41(5): 371-384
Bulter J K. Conflict Styles and Outcomes in a Negotiation with Fully-integrative Potential. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1994, 5: 309-325
Burnham T, McCabe K, Smith V L. Friend-or-foe Intentionality Priming in an Extensive Form Trust Game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 2000, 43: 57-73
Carnevale P J, De Dreu C K W. Motive: The Negotiator's Raison d'Etre. in: Thompson L, Ed. Negotiation Theory and Research. New York: Psychology Press, 2006. 55-79
Carnevale P J, Lawler E J. Time Pressure and the Development of Integrative Agreements in Bilateral Negotiation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1986, 30: 636-659
Carroll J S, Bazerman M H, Maury R. Negotiator Cognitions: A Descriptive Approach to Negotiator's Understanding of Their Opponents. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1988, 41(3): 352-370
Carver C S, Sutton S K, Scheier M F. Action, Emotion, and Personality: Emerging Conceptual Integration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2000, 26: 741-751
Chaiken S, Liberman A, Eagly A H. Heuristic and Systematic Processing within and beyond the Persuasion Context. in: Uleman J S, Bargh J A, Eds. Unintended thought. New York: Guilford, 1989.212 252
Chen S, Lee-Chai A Y, Bargh J A. Relationship Orientation as a Moderator of the Effects of Social Power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 80: 173-187
Curhan J R, Elfenbein H A, Xu H. What Do People Value When They Negotiate? Mapping the Domain of Subjective Value in Negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006. 91(3): 493-512
De Dreu C K W. Coercive Power and Concession Making in Bilateral Negotiation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1995, 39(4): 646-670
De Dreu C K W. Time Pressure and Closing of the Mind in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2003, 91: 280-295
De Dreu C K W, Beersma B, Stroebe K, et al. Motivated Information Processing, Strategic Choice, and the Quality of Negotiated Agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, 90(6): 927-943
De Dreu C K W, Boles T. Share and Share Alike or Winner Take All? Impact of Social Value Orientation on the Choice and Recall of Decision Heuristics in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1998, 76: 253-267
De Dreu C K W, Carnevale P J. Motivational Bases for Information Processing and Strategic Choice in Conflict and Negotiation. in: Zanna M P, Ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol.35. New York: Academic Press, 2003.235-291
De Dreu C K W, Evers A, Beersma B, et al. A Theory-based Measure of Conflict Management Strategies in the Workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2001, 22: 645-668
De Dreu C K W, Koole S, Oldersma F L. On the Seizing and Freezing of Negotiator Inferences: Need for Cognitive Closure Moderates the Use of Heuristics in Negotiation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1999,25: 348-362
De Dreu C K W, Koole S, Steinel W. Unfixing the Fixed-pie: A Motivated Information Processing of Integrative Negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000b, 79: 975-987
De Dreu C K W, McCusker C. Gain-loss Frames and Cooperation in Two-person Social Dilemmas: A Transformational Analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997, 72(5): 1093-1106
De Dreu C K W, Van Kleef G A. The Influence of Power on the Information Search, Impression Formation, and Demands in Negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2004, 40(3): 303-319
De Dreu C K W, Weingart L R, Kwon S. Influence of Social Motives on Integrative Negotiation: A Meta-analytical Review and Test of Two Theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000a, 78: 889-905
Deutsh M. A Theory of Cooperation and Competition. Human Relations, 1949, 2: 199-231
Devine P G. Stereotypes and Prejudice: Their Automatic and Controlled Components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1989, 56: 5-18
Diekmann K A, Samuels S M, Ross L, et al. Self-interest and Fairness in Problems of Resource Allocation: Allocators versus Recipients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997,72(5): 1061-1074
Diekmann K A, Tenbrunsel A E, Ahah P P, et al. The Descriptive and Prescriptive Use of Previous Purchase Price in Negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1996, 66(2): 179-191
Ebenbach D H, Keltner D. Power, Emotion and Judgmental Accuracy in Social Conflict: Motivating the Cognitive Miser. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1998, 20: 7-21
Emerson R M. Power Dependence Relations. American Sociological Review, 1962, 27: 31-41
Fazio R H, Sanbonmatsu D M, Powell M C, et al. On the Automatic Activation of Attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 50: 229-238 1986
Fisher Fisher R, Ury W. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in. Houghton- Mifflin: Boston, MA, 1981
Fiske S T. Controlling Other People: The Impact of Power on Stereotyping. American Psychologist, 1993, 48(6): 621-628
Fiske S T, Neuberg S L. A Continuum Model of Impression Formation, from Category-based to Individuating Processes: Influence of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation, in: Zanna M P, Ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol.23. New York: Academic Press, 1990. 1-74
French J, Raven B. The Bases of Social Power, in Cartwright D, Ed. Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, 1959. 150-167
Fry W R, Firestone I J, Williams D L. Negotiation Process and Outcome of Stranger Dyads and Dating Couples: Do Lovers Lose? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1984, 4: 1-16
Galinsky A D, Gruenfeld D H, Magee J C. From Power to Action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2003, 85(3): 453-466
Galinsky A D, Mussweiler T. First Offers as Anchors: The Role of Perspective-taking and Negotiation Focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 81: 657-669
Gelfand M J, Cai D A. The Cultural Structuring of the Social Context of Negotiation, in: Gelfand M J, Brett J M, Eds. Handbook of Negotiation: Theoretical Advances and Cultural Perspectives. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004. 238-257
Gelfand M J, Christakopoulou S. Culture and Negotiator Cognition: Judgment Accuracy and Negotiation Processes in Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1999, 79(3): 248-269
Gelfand M J, Nishii L H, Holcombe K M, et al. Cultural Influences on Cognitive Representations of Conflict: Interpretations of Conflict Episodes in the United States and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2001, 86(6): 1059-1074
Gelfand M J, Realo A. 1999 Individualism-Collectivism and Accountability in Intergroup Negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1999, 84(5): 721-736
Gilbert D T. Ordinary Personology. in: Gilbert D, Fisk S T, Lindzey G, Eds. Handbook of Social Psychology. 4th ed. Vol.2. New York: Academic Press, 1998. 89-150
Gilbert D T, Krull D S, Pelham B W. Of Thoughts Unspoken: Social Inference and the Self-regulation of Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, 55: 685-694
Goodwin S A, Gubin A, Fiske S, Yzerbyt V Y. Power Can Bias Impression Processes: Stereotyping Subordinates by Default and by Design. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 2000,3:227-256
Hall J A, Rosip J C, Le Beau L S, et al. Attributing the Sources of Accuracy in Unequal-power Dyadic Communication: Who is Better and Why? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2006, 42(1): 18-27
Henderson M D, Trope Y, Carnevale P J. Negotiation from a Near and Distant Time Perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, 91(4): 712-729
Higgins E T. Beyond Pleasure and Pain. American Psychologist, 1997, 52: 1280-1300
Howard E S, Gardner W L, Thompson L. The Role of the Self-Concept and the Social Context in Determining the Behavior of Power Holders: Self-Construal in Intergroup Versus Dyadic Dispute Resolution Negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007, 93(6): 614-631
Idson L C, Chugh D, Bereby-Meyer Y, et al. Overcoming Focusing Failures in Competitive Environments. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2004, 17: 159-172
Kahneman D. Reference Points, Anchors, Norms, and Mixed Feelings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1992, 51(2): 296-312
Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica, 1979,47: 263-291
Kelley H H, Beckman L L, Fischer C S. Negotiation the Division of Reward under Incomplete Information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1967,3:361-389
Keltner D, Gruenfeld D H, Anderson C. Power, Approach, and Inhibition. Psychological Review, 2003,110(2): 265-284
Keltner D, Robinson R J. Imagined Ideological Differences in Conflict Escalation and Resolution. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1993, 4(3): 249-262
Keltner D, Robinson R J. Defending the Status Quo: Power and Bias in Social Conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1997,23:1066-1077
Kim P H, Fragale A R. Choosing the Path to Bargaining Power: An Empirical Comparison of BATNAs and Contributions in Negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2005, 90(2): 373-381
Kim P H, Pinkley R L, Fragale A R. Power Dynamics in Negotiation. Academy of Management Review, 2005, 30(4): 799-822
Kim P H. Strategic Timing in Group Negotiations: The Implications of Forced Entry and Forced Exit for Negotiators with Unequal Power. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1997, 71: 263-286
Kipnis D, Schmidt S M, Wilkinson I. Intraorganizational Influence Tactics: Explorations in Getting One's Way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1980, 65: 440-452
Kramer R M, Newton E, Pommerenke P L. Self-enhancement Biases and Negotiator Judgment: Effects of Self-esteem and Mood. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1993,56(1): 110-133
Kruglanski A W. The Psychology of Being "Right": The Problem of Accuracy in Social Perception and Cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 1989, 106(2): 395-409
Kruglanski A W, Webster D M. Motivational Closing of the Mind: "Seizing" and "Freezing". Psychological Review, 1996, 103: 263-283
Kuhlman D M, Marshello A. Individual Differences in Game Motivation as Moderators of Preprogrammed Strategy Effects in Prisoner's Dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32: 922-931
Lerner J S, Tetlock P E. Accounting for the Effects of Accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 1999, 125(2): 255-275
Lim R G, Carnevale P J. Influencing Mediator Behavior through Bargainer Framing. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1995, 6(4): 349-368
Lim R G. Overconfidence in Negotiation Revisited. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1997, 8(1): 52-79
Magee J C, Galinsky A D, Gruenfeld D H. Power, Propensity to Negotiate, and Moving First in Competitive Interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2007, 33(2): 200-212
Mannix E A. The Influence of Power, Distribution Norms and Task Meeting Structure on Resource Allocation in Small Group Negotiation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1993,4:5-23
Mannix E A, Neale M A. Power Imbalance and Pattern of Exchange in Dyadic Negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1993, 2(2): 119-133
Mannix E A, Thompson L L, Bazerman M H. Negotiation in Small Groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1989, 74: 508-517
Moore D A, Kurtzberg T R, Thompson L, et al. Long and Short Routes to Success in Electronically Mediated Negotiations: Group Affiliations and Good Vibrations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1999, 77(1): 22-43
Naquin C E, Paulson G D. Online Bargaining and Interpersonal Trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(1): 113-120
Neale M A. The Effects of Negotiation and Arbitration Cost Salience on Bargainer Behavior: The Role of the Arbitrator and Constituency on Negotiator Judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1984, 34(1): 97-111
Neale M A. New Recruit, in: Brett J M, Ed. Teaching Materials for Negotiations and Decision Making. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University, Dispute Resolution Research Center. 1997
Neale M A, Bazerman M H. Cognition and Rationality in Negotiation. New York: Free Press, 1991
Ng S H. The Social Psychology of Power. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1980
Northcraft G B, Neale M A. Experts, Amateurs, and Real Estate: An Anchoring-and-adjustment Perspective on Property Pricing Decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1987, 39(1): 84-97
O'Connor K M, Carnevale P J. A Nasty but Effective Negotiation Strategy: Misrepresentaion of a Common-value Issue. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1997, 23:504-515
Olekalns M. Situational Cues as Moderators of the Frame-outcome Relationship. British Journal of Social Psychology, 1997, 36(2): 191-209
Olekalns M, Smith P L. Testing the Relationships among Negotiators' Motivational Orientations, Strategy Choices and Outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003, 39: 101-117
Overbeck J R, Park B. Powerful Perceivers, Powerless Objects: Flexibility of Powerholders' Social Attention. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2006, 99: 227-243
Overbeck J R, Park B. When Power Does not Corrupt: Superior Individuation Processes among Powerful Perceivers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 81: 549-565
Pinkley R L, Griffith T L, Northcraft G B. Fixed Pie a la Mode: Information Availability, Information Processing, and the Negation of Suboptimal Agreements. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1995, 62(1): 101-112
Pinkley R L, Neale M A, Bennett R J, et al. The Impact of Alternatives to Settlement in Dyadic Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1994, 57(1): 97-116
Polzer J T. Intergroup Negotiations: The Effects of Negotiating Teams. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1996,40: 678-698
Polzer J T, Mannix E A, Neale M A. Interest Alignment and Coalitions in Multi Party Negotiation. Academic Management Journal, 1998, 41: 42-54
Pruitt, D G, Lewis, S A. Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31: 621-633
Pruitt D G, Rubin J Z. Social Conflict: Escalation, Statemate, and Settlement. New York: Random House, 1986
Pruitt D G. Social Conflict, in: Gilbert D, Fisk S T, Lindzey Q, Eds. Handbook of Social Psychology. 4th ed. Vol.2. New York: Academic Press, 1998. 89-150
Purdy J M, Nye P. The Impact of Communication Media on Negotiation Outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 2000,11(2): 162-187
Raiffa H. The Art and Science of Negotiation. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 1982
Ritov I. Anchoring in Simulated Competitive Market Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1996,67(1): 16-25
Rolls E T. The Orbitofrontal Cortex and Reward. Cerebral Cortex, 2000,10: 284-294
Ross L, Stillinger C. Barriers to Conflict Resolution. Negotiation Journal, 1991, 7(4): 389-404
Rubin J, Pruitt D G, Kim S. Social Conflict: Escalation, Statemate, and Settlement. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994
Russell B. Power: A New Social Analysis. London: Allen and Unwin, 1938
Schwarz N, Clore G L. Feelings and Phenomenal Experiences, in Higgins E T, Kruglanski A W, Eds. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic PrinciplesNew York: Guilford Press, 1996. 433-465
Smith P K, Trope Y. You Focus on the Forest When You're in Charge of the Trees: Power Priming and Abstract Information Processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, 90(4): 578-596
Snodgrass S E. Further Effects of Role versus Gender on Interpersonal Sensitivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1992, 62: 154-158
Sondak H, Bazerman M H. Power Balance and the Rationality of Outcomes in Matching Markets. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1991, 50(1): 1-23
Stapel D A, Koomen W. I, We, and the Effects of Others on Me: How Self-Construal Level Moderates Social Comparison Effects. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 80: 766-781
Stevens L E, Fiske S T. Motivated Impressions of a Power holder: Accuracy under Task Dependency and Misperception under Evaluation Dependency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2000, 26: 907-922
Thompson L. Negotiation Behavior and Outcomes: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Issues. Psychological Bulletin, 1990, 108: 515-532
Thompson L. The Impact of Minimum Goals and Aspirations on Judgments of Success in Negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1995, 4(6): 513-524
Thompson L. The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator. 2nd. New York: Prentice Hall, 2004
Thompson L, Ed. Negotiation Theory and Research. New York: Psychology Press, 2006
Thompson L, DeHarpport T. Social Judgment, Feedback, and Interpersonal Learning in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1994, 58(3): 327-345
Thompson L, Hastie R. Social Perception in Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1990,47(1): 98-123
Thompson L, Hrebec D. Lose-lose Agreements in Interdependent Decision Making. Psychological Bulletin, 1996, 120(3): 396-409
Thompson L, Mannix E A, Bazerman M H. Group Negotiation: Effects of Decision Rule, Agenda, and Aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, 54: 86-95
Tor A, Bazerman M H. Focusing Failures in Competitive Environments: Explaining Decision Errors in the Monty Hall Game, the Acquiring a Company Problem, and Multiparty Ultimatums. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2003, 16(5): 353-374
Trope Y, Liberman N. Temporal Construal. Psychological Review, 2003, 110: 403-421
Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 1974, 185: 1124-1131
Ulijn, J M, Lincke A. The Effect of CMC and FTF on Negotiation Outcomes between R&D and Manufacturing Partners in the Supply Chain: An Anglo/Nordic/Latin Comparison. International Negotiation, 2004,9: 111-140
Valley K L, Moag J, Bazerman M H. A Matter of Trust: Effects of Communication on the Efficiency and Distribution of Outcomes. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1998, 34(2): 211-238
Van de Vliert E. Positive Effects of Conflict: A Field Assessment. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1990, 1: 69-80
Van de Vliert E. Complex interpersonal conflict behavior. London: Psychology Press, 1997
Van Kleef G A, De Dreu C K W, Pietroni D, et al. Power and Emotion in Negotiation: Power Moderates the Interpersonal Effects of Anger and Happiness on Concession Making. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2006, 36(4): 557-581
Van Kleef G A, De Dreu C K W, Manstead A S R. The Interpersonal Effects of Emotions in Negotiations: A Motivated Information Processing Approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2004, 87: 510-528
Van Lange P A. The Pursuit of Joint Outcomes and Equality in Outcomes: An Integrative Model of Social Value Orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999, 77: 337-349
Wegner D M, Bargh J A. Control and Automaticity in Social Life, in: Gilbert D, Fiske S T, Lindzey G, Eds. Handbook of Social Psychology. 4th ed. Vol.2. New York: Academic Press, 1998. 446-496
Weingart L R, Brett J M, Olekalns M, et al. Conflicting Social Motives in Negotiating Groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007, 93(6): 994-1010
Weingart L R, Bennett R J, Brett J M. The Impact of Consideration of Issues and Motivational Orientation on Group Negotiation Process and Outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993, 78: 504-517
Weingart L R, Hyder E, Prietula M J. Knowledge Matters: The Effect of Tactical Descriptions on Negotiation Behavior and Outcome. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, 70: 1205-1217
Wolfe R J, McGinn K L. Perceived Relative Power and its Influence on Negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2005, 14(1): 3-20
Woike B A. The Use of Differentiation and Integration Processes: Empirical Studies of "Separate" and "Connected" Ways of Thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1994,67: 142-150