Negotiations are important processes that can happen anywhere from an office to a private setting. Previous research has already stated that information exchange can help to come to a so called...Show moreNegotiations are important processes that can happen anywhere from an office to a private setting. Previous research has already stated that information exchange can help to come to a so called integrative agreement (win-win situation), which usually leads to better outcomes for both parties. However, there is still little known about the strategies to seek information. One way of seeking information is through asking either open or closed questions. Therefore, the current research investigates whether there is a difference between open and closed questions on negotiation outcomes. The prediction was that open questions generate a higher integrative agreement, higher subjective value and higher trust in the other party than closed questions. The experiment consisted of 48 duos who negotiated about organising a teamday. Both participants took on a role which was connected to a certain point distribution system. It has been found that, contradicting the predictions, there were no significant differences found between closed and open questions on integrative agreement, higher subjective value and higher level of trust. Certain experimental factors like the roleplay, time pressure and a participation lottery, could have influenced the results. Therefore, more research is needed on this topic to check if the results can be confirmed or rejected.Show less
Research master thesis | Psychology (research) (MSc)
closed access
Within negotiations individuals differ in their motivation to reach certain outcomes over others (outcome orientation). These differences may exaggerate as asymmetrical power dynamics impose...Show moreWithin negotiations individuals differ in their motivation to reach certain outcomes over others (outcome orientation). These differences may exaggerate as asymmetrical power dynamics impose disadvantageous conditions for some individuals within a group. As such restrictions may limit an individual’s ability to realise its interest in certain outcomes, individuals may evoke compensatory mechanisms to alleviate these disadvantages. Building on previous studies (Van Tol & Steinel, 2019), we propose that creative cognitions (e.g., flexibility or originality) may qualify as such potential compensatory mechanism. Consequently, we predict that the effect of individual outcome orientation in relation to an asymmetrical dispersion of power within groups may motivate compensatory engagements in creative behaviours that aim to alleviate the effects of disadvantageous situational constraints. To this end, 150 participants took part in a three-person fictious face-to-face online study. Participants were randomly assigned to either a powerful, powerless, or equal power condition, whilst further differentiations ensured individualistic and collectivistic outcome orientations. Upon reading the instructions, participants completed both a flexibility and an originality task. Results of a 2 (social motive: pro-social vs. pro-self) x 3 (relative power: powerless vs. equal power vs. powerful) ANOVA, as well as a 2 (social motive: pro-social vs. pro-self) x 3 (relative power: powerless vs. equal power vs. powerful) ANCOVA (with individual knowledge about cooking as covariate) revealed non-significant interaction effects for both flexible (ANOVA) and original (ANCOVA) compensation. Across the possible combinations of powerless and powerful, and pro-social and pro-self, participants did not differ in their creativity scores, disconfirming our hypotheses. As these null findings stand in direct contradiction to previous literature, the need for further investigation of creative cognitions in negotiations is highlighted.Show less
Gender differences in negotiation behaviours and outcomes have been widely studied, reflecting societal stereotypes. These stereotypes associate men with assertiveness and women with agreeableness....Show moreGender differences in negotiation behaviours and outcomes have been widely studied, reflecting societal stereotypes. These stereotypes associate men with assertiveness and women with agreeableness. Such gendered socialization has led to distinct negotiation styles, often influenced by contextual factors like negotiation roles and subjects. Additionally, balancing negotiators’ gender influences behaviours; women tend to be more prosocial when negotiating with women. Research shows that experimenter gender can activate stereotypes in this same way, impacting negotiation behaviours. However, there is limited understanding of how experimenter gender affects female negotiation behaviour. This study examines the influence of experimenter gender and social motive on female participants' first offers and concession size. Employing a 2 x 2 design, female participants (N = 97) engaged in an online, chat-based negotiation, had a pro-social or individual motive, and a female or male experimenter. While no significant effects emerged for the independent variables on first offer, social motive significantly influenced concession size on the first negotiation issue. A significant interaction effect of social motive and experimenter gender was found for the first negotiation issue as well. These findings suggest that experimenter gender alone does not affect female negotiation behaviour, but social motives and their interaction with experimenter gender does. Contextual and demographical factors need to be considered when researching the interplay between experimenter gender and female negotiation behaviour. The results of this study can be used by professionals, as well as negotiation trainers and women in general to increase awareness and decrease the effect of gender stereotypes on female negotiation behaviour.Show less
Privacy is a hotly debated topic. Many claim that their privacy is of great importance to them, yet at the same time people are prone to self-disclose a lot of information online. This privacy...Show morePrivacy is a hotly debated topic. Many claim that their privacy is of great importance to them, yet at the same time people are prone to self-disclose a lot of information online. This privacy paradox is at the centre of a lot of scholarly debate. By expanding on the horizontal/vertical privacy model by Quinn and Epstein (2018, July), this thesis aims to better understand the privacy paradox. Horizontal privacy pertains to sharing information in the peer domain. Vertical privacy pertains to sharing information in the government/corporation domain. Using a fictious social networking site, self-report measures were taken that predict behaviour. 165 (71 male; 94 female) Participants were led to believe that their data was breached and leaked either in the horizontal or vertical domain or not at all. It was hypothesized that data breaches, and the horizontal data breach in particular, would create negative experiences that would lead to discontinuing the fictitious SNS. The results of this thesis remain inconclusive. No significant differences between the horizontal, vertical data breaches and control condition were found. Although the data do not support the research hypotheses, the present study does give some insights in how to improve future research. What is more, it makes a case for the horizontal/vertical privacy model, since it nevertheless can be of use to both scholars and society.Show less
This study investigated the concept ‘expanding the pie’ in unequal power dyads by the option to involve optional topics to the negotiation in order to reach an integrative and optimal agreement....Show moreThis study investigated the concept ‘expanding the pie’ in unequal power dyads by the option to involve optional topics to the negotiation in order to reach an integrative and optimal agreement. Predicted was that low-power negotiators initiated more optional topics compared to high-power negotiators and that this would lead to a higher negotiation quality and a higher joint outcome. Furthermore, predicted was that high-power negotiators would only initiate the optional topics that were beneficial for them, and that low-power negotiators would initiate all the optional topics. The participants (N=88 dyads) were introduced to a newly developed dyad face-to-face negotiation task, where participants had the option to initiate optional topics beside the mandatory topics, with the goal to expand the pie and reach an optimal outcome. Results show that, against expectations, high-power and low-power negotiators do not differ in the frequency they initiate the optional topics, and power does not have an effect on negotiation quality and joint outcome. Furthermore, not only high-power negotiators initiate optional topics that are beneficial for them, but low-power negotiators do this as well. Suggested is that negotiators are influenced by the way the task is framed and develop an individualistic motivation which stands in the way of creating an integrative and optimal agreement. The effects of unequal power, implications and limitations of the study and future research are further discussed.Show less
Negotiating is an intricate process and crucial to finding success in all facets of life. Constructs such as stereotype endorsement and threat, social motives and power distributions play an...Show moreNegotiating is an intricate process and crucial to finding success in all facets of life. Constructs such as stereotype endorsement and threat, social motives and power distributions play an important role in negotiations. Negotiations are not limited to dyads; often they take place in a group setting. Whilst both men and women negotiate, there appear to be differences in performance between the two. The question that this paper looks to address is what the influence of stereotype endorsement and stereotype threat is on the outcome of both pro-self and pro-socially motivated, mixed gender groups, where power is dispersed unequally. The two main hypotheses that follow are that men in the leadership position will outperform women in the leadership position in the pro-self motivated condition. Furthermore, groups with a female leader will outperform groups with a male leader in the pro-socially motivated condition. To investigate this, 204 participants were recruited into 68 three person groups, comprising 105 men and 99 women. They played a negotiation game, emulating the owners of a beach club. Their scores and answers on a questionnaire following the game were brought into analysis. Results show that men and women perform better or worse depending on the social motive and the power distribution of the negotiation. Also, the leader is especially impacted by stereotypes surrounding their gender. The differences between men and women might be explained by the effects of gender stereotypes. Being aware of the influence of gender stereotypes on negotiation performance might serve individuals well in order to increase their performance in negotiations.Show less
Past research has suggested that work-life balance plays an important role in maintaining a healthy work environment and enhanced productivity, as well as improved mental and physical health (Zheng...Show morePast research has suggested that work-life balance plays an important role in maintaining a healthy work environment and enhanced productivity, as well as improved mental and physical health (Zheng et al., 2015). Work-life balance crafting intentions among entrepreneurs were investigated, given that a critical aspect behind maintaining a healthy work-life balance is one’s motivation to actually craft it. Two variables that may predict entrepreneurs’ intentions to craft and preserve a healthy work-life balance, growth intentions and workaholism, were thus examined in a cross-sectional study employing actual entrepreneurs (N = 172). The results of this study demonstrated that growth intentions were positively and significantly predictive of work-life balance, whereas workaholism was negatively and significantly predictive of work-life balance. The findings of this research provided supporting evidence that workaholism could lead to lower intentions of entrepreneurs to maintain a work-life balance, whereas growth intentions seem to predict a higher engagement in proactive behaviors aimed to maintain a work-life balance.Show less
This study examined how social motives and power-differences influence the outcome of a dyadic negotiation task. It was predicted that both social motives and power-differences influence the extent...Show moreThis study examined how social motives and power-differences influence the outcome of a dyadic negotiation task. It was predicted that both social motives and power-differences influence the extent to which extra value is added to the negotiation (i.e. ‘expanding the pie’). In the “Sandwich Heaven” negotiation task (N = 192), participants negotiated according to the “Mandatory-Optional Issue Paradigm”. Participants had to agree on the five mandatory issues and had the option to include three additional issues. Dyads were randomly assigned to one of four conditions of the two (power: equal versus difference) x 2 (social motive: prosocial versus proself) design. The manipulations of power and social motive were operationalized through the instructions. Results showed that both social motive, and the combination of social motive and power, did not have a significant effect on the negotiated outcome. Prosocial oriented people were found to add more additional issues to the deal than proself oriented people.Show less
Nowadays, the focus of negotiation is increasingly on cooperative bargaining and achieving a win-win situation. This study uses a new research paradigm that examines adding subjects to the...Show moreNowadays, the focus of negotiation is increasingly on cooperative bargaining and achieving a win-win situation. This study uses a new research paradigm that examines adding subjects to the negotiation, also known as increasing the size of the pie. This research was conducted in a social setting where alcohol consumption was a factor. The purpose of this study is to find out whether adding topics to the negotiation and alcohol consumption leads to a better negotiation process and better outcomes for both parties. To this end, 190 participants participated in face-to-face conventional role-play negotiations in pairs and completed a questionnaire afterwards. It was found that the participant who could originally gain more points from the negotiation had less resistance to yielding when the topics were added at the beginning of the negotiation. The participant who was originally able to get fewer points out of the negotiation acted more simultaneously when the topics were added at the beginning of the negotiation. In addition, a cautious trend was found of more concern for other when an average amount of alcohol was consumed by the participant who could achieve fewer points and more concern for other by the participant who could achieve more points when the items were added at the beginning of the negotiation.Show less
How are effects of social motive affected by asymmetric power dispersion in a three-person negotiation, and does this effect differ between groups of friends and strangers? It was hypothesized that...Show moreHow are effects of social motive affected by asymmetric power dispersion in a three-person negotiation, and does this effect differ between groups of friends and strangers? It was hypothesized that pro-social groups would reach the highest joint outcomes with a leader operating under an unanimity decision rule, followed by groups with a dictator, followed groups without a boss. A pro-self group with a dictator was thought to reach the lowest joint outcomes, followed by one with a leader, followed one without a boss. It was furthermore hypothesized that the effects of a pro-self motive would be stronger in a group of strangers, and the effects of a pro-social motive were thought to be stronger in a group of friends. Results of the three-person Aloha Beach Club negotiation game supported only the hypotheses about the amplifying effect of power differences on social motive.Show less
In recent decades, there has been an increased scholarly interest in negotiation, both on distributive and integrative bargaining. The latter is characterized by the expansion of the resource pool...Show moreIn recent decades, there has been an increased scholarly interest in negotiation, both on distributive and integrative bargaining. The latter is characterized by the expansion of the resource pool or pie, in a way that both negotiators benefit from the outcome. The resource pool is only expanded when negotiators manage to create value by finding alternative solutions to issues that increase the joint gain of both parties. In this study, we used a two-person roleplay negotiation conducted face-to-face in an informal setting (N = 95) to explore the influence of alcohol and order of presented issues on joint gain. We find no systematic differences within the alcohol conditions and order conditions on joint gain. While some of the possible patterns we find are not conclusive yet, further research could yield interesting results.Show less
Group negotiations are an important aspect of social interactions and can be strongly influenced by familiarity, social motive and power differences between involved parties. A pro-social motive...Show moreGroup negotiations are an important aspect of social interactions and can be strongly influenced by familiarity, social motive and power differences between involved parties. A pro-social motive was associated with more concern for the needs of others. Powerful individuals in the asymmetric power conditions were expected to have more influence on the outcome. Friends were expected to have more integrative results compared with strangers. Additionally, groups that trusted each other were expected to reach higher joint outcomes by openly sharing information. The results of a three-person online negotiation exercise supported a crucial role of trust. Groups that trust each other reached higher joint outcomes for all experimental conditions. The integrative potential of the outcome was not influenced by the groups consisting of friends or strangers. Pro-social motive groups reached more integrative outcome for groups of friends and stranger alike. Furthermore, participants that were given more power had more influence on the outcome of the negotiation. Contradicting our expectations, strangers showed more concern for a fair and considerate negotiation process.Show less
