This study aimed to investigate if the nature of questions posed during a dyadic negotiation, either open or closed, had an impact on the negotiation outcomes. Our hypothesis was that the use of...Show moreThis study aimed to investigate if the nature of questions posed during a dyadic negotiation, either open or closed, had an impact on the negotiation outcomes. Our hypothesis was that the use of open-ended questions would enhance both objective and subjective value outcomes while reducing the perception of a fixed pie. The study showed that questions asked during a dyadic negotiation, either open or closed ended, did not influence the measurable aspects of a negotiation agreement that can be evaluated on objective criteria F(2, 45) = 1.784, p = .180. Additionally, it did not significantly change the perceived worth or importance that an individual or party places on a particular item, outcome, or concession during the negotiation process F(2, 45) = .581, p = .563. Finally, asking either open or closed ended questions did not significantly change the perception of a fixed pie participants had F(2, 45) = .637, p = .534.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
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
