Suchergebnisse

"Negotiators often fail to reach integrative ('win–win') agreements because they think that their own and other's preferences are diametrically opposed—the so-called fixed-pie perception. We examined how verbal (Experiment 1) and nonverbal (Experiment 2) emotional expressions may reduce fixed-pie perception and promote integrative behavior. In a two-issue computer-simulated negotiation, participants negotiated with a counterpart emitting one of the following emotional response patterns: (1) anger on both issues, (2) anger on participant's high priority issue and happiness on participant's low-priority issue, (3) happiness on high priority issue and anger on low-priority issue, or (4) happiness on both issues. In both studies, the third pattern reduced fixed-pie perception and increased integrative behavior, whereas the second pattern amplified bias and reduced integrative behavior. Implications for how emotions shape social exchange are discussed." (author's abstract)

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to investigate how the emotion expressed by a fictitious proposer influences the responder's decision to accept or reject a severely unfair deal, represented by the splitting of a predetermined sum of money between the two players during an ultimatum game (UG). Rejection leads both parts to dissipate that sum. Critically the authors consider the situation in which both players have the best alternative to negotiation agreement (BATNA), which simulates a backup plan to rely on in case of no agreement.Design/methodology/approachThe participants played a UG and, to foster the ecological validity of the paradigm, the parts could both rely on a more or less generous BATNA. The critical manipulation was the emotion expressed by the proposer while their BATNA was either hidden (Exp. 1) or communicated (Exp. 2).FindingsThe proposer's emotions influenced participants' own emotions, affected their social evaluations about the proposer, the desire for future interactions with the proposer and were used to infer the proposer's BATNA when it was unknown. In this latter case, proposers' emotions and in particular his/her happiness, decreased dramatically the participants' tendency to reject even severely unfair offers.Originality/valuePast research on UG has been predominantly aimed to investigate the effect of responders' emotions or the effects of responders' emotions on the proposer, devoting little attention to how the critical responder's acceptance/rejection decision might be affected by the proposer's emotion. Especially in the ecological situation where the parts have a BATNA in case of non-agreement.

Previous research has shown that people attach a different value to exemplars of money having similar nominal values but dissimilar physical features. In particular, recent data have suggested that American people attach higher value to $1 banknotes than to $1 coins. These results have been explained in terms of familiarity since the $1 coin was introduced recently and is, therefore, less familiar than the $1 banknote. We suggest an alternative explanation based on the different mental accounts associated with the use of coins and banknotes. Experiments 1–3 show that people are willing to pay more when using coins than banknotes regardless of their familiarity with these exemplars of money. Experiment 3 also shows that people overestimate the amount of money at their disposal when they are provided with banknotes and underestimate it when using coins. Experiment 4 reveals that people using banknotes are more sensitive to discounts than people using coins. Finally, Experiment 5 indicates that people implicitly associate coins with low value products and banknotes with high value products.