Mental contrasting promotes integrative bargaining

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: This paper aims to test the impact of several self-regulatory strategies on an integrative bargaining task. Design/methodology/approach: Participants were randomly assigned to dyads and negotiated over the sale of a car. Before negotiating, participants were prompted to engage in one of three self-regulation strategies, based upon fantasy realization theory (FRT): to mentally contrast a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining, to exclusively elaborate on successful future agreement, or to exclusively elaborate on the reality of bargaining. Those in the control condition merely began the negotiation. Findings: Mentally contrasting a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining leads dyads to reach the largest and most equitable joint agreements, compared to dyads that elaborate only on successful future agreement, or on the reality of bargaining. Research limitations/implications: Since it was found that mental contrasting promotes integrative agreement, it is important to learn more about the psychological processes that mediate and moderate this effect. Another related line of research would examine the application of the findings to other bargaining scenarios. One further future line of research should combine mental contrasting with planning strategies. Originality/value: The findings of the paper have implications for both self-regulation and negotiation research. The result that mental contrasting fosters integrative solutions reflects its potential to help negotiators effectively discriminate among feasible and unfeasible components of a multi-faceted goal (integrative agreement). For negotiation research, the paper identifies an effective self-regulatory strategy for producing high-quality agreements.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)324-341
Number of pages18
JournalInternational Journal of Conflict Management
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2011

Fingerprint

dyad
self-regulation
planning conception
sale
Sales
Railroad cars
Integrative bargaining
scenario
Planning
methodology
Dyads
Values
Self-regulation

Keywords

  • Agreements
  • Individual psychology
  • Negotiating
  • Targets
  • Task analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication
  • Management of Technology and Innovation
  • Strategy and Management

Cite this

Mental contrasting promotes integrative bargaining. / Kirk, Dan; Oettingen, Gabriele; Gollwitzer, Peter.

In: International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 22, No. 4, 10.2011, p. 324-341.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5dd3a7eac197401f98bc08de3780ef04,
title = "Mental contrasting promotes integrative bargaining",
abstract = "Purpose: This paper aims to test the impact of several self-regulatory strategies on an integrative bargaining task. Design/methodology/approach: Participants were randomly assigned to dyads and negotiated over the sale of a car. Before negotiating, participants were prompted to engage in one of three self-regulation strategies, based upon fantasy realization theory (FRT): to mentally contrast a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining, to exclusively elaborate on successful future agreement, or to exclusively elaborate on the reality of bargaining. Those in the control condition merely began the negotiation. Findings: Mentally contrasting a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining leads dyads to reach the largest and most equitable joint agreements, compared to dyads that elaborate only on successful future agreement, or on the reality of bargaining. Research limitations/implications: Since it was found that mental contrasting promotes integrative agreement, it is important to learn more about the psychological processes that mediate and moderate this effect. Another related line of research would examine the application of the findings to other bargaining scenarios. One further future line of research should combine mental contrasting with planning strategies. Originality/value: The findings of the paper have implications for both self-regulation and negotiation research. The result that mental contrasting fosters integrative solutions reflects its potential to help negotiators effectively discriminate among feasible and unfeasible components of a multi-faceted goal (integrative agreement). For negotiation research, the paper identifies an effective self-regulatory strategy for producing high-quality agreements.",
keywords = "Agreements, Individual psychology, Negotiating, Targets, Task analysis",
author = "Dan Kirk and Gabriele Oettingen and Peter Gollwitzer",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1108/10444061111171341",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "324--341",
journal = "International Journal of Conflict Management",
issn = "1044-4068",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mental contrasting promotes integrative bargaining

AU - Kirk, Dan

AU - Oettingen, Gabriele

AU - Gollwitzer, Peter

PY - 2011/10

Y1 - 2011/10

N2 - Purpose: This paper aims to test the impact of several self-regulatory strategies on an integrative bargaining task. Design/methodology/approach: Participants were randomly assigned to dyads and negotiated over the sale of a car. Before negotiating, participants were prompted to engage in one of three self-regulation strategies, based upon fantasy realization theory (FRT): to mentally contrast a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining, to exclusively elaborate on successful future agreement, or to exclusively elaborate on the reality of bargaining. Those in the control condition merely began the negotiation. Findings: Mentally contrasting a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining leads dyads to reach the largest and most equitable joint agreements, compared to dyads that elaborate only on successful future agreement, or on the reality of bargaining. Research limitations/implications: Since it was found that mental contrasting promotes integrative agreement, it is important to learn more about the psychological processes that mediate and moderate this effect. Another related line of research would examine the application of the findings to other bargaining scenarios. One further future line of research should combine mental contrasting with planning strategies. Originality/value: The findings of the paper have implications for both self-regulation and negotiation research. The result that mental contrasting fosters integrative solutions reflects its potential to help negotiators effectively discriminate among feasible and unfeasible components of a multi-faceted goal (integrative agreement). For negotiation research, the paper identifies an effective self-regulatory strategy for producing high-quality agreements.

AB - Purpose: This paper aims to test the impact of several self-regulatory strategies on an integrative bargaining task. Design/methodology/approach: Participants were randomly assigned to dyads and negotiated over the sale of a car. Before negotiating, participants were prompted to engage in one of three self-regulation strategies, based upon fantasy realization theory (FRT): to mentally contrast a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining, to exclusively elaborate on successful future agreement, or to exclusively elaborate on the reality of bargaining. Those in the control condition merely began the negotiation. Findings: Mentally contrasting a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining leads dyads to reach the largest and most equitable joint agreements, compared to dyads that elaborate only on successful future agreement, or on the reality of bargaining. Research limitations/implications: Since it was found that mental contrasting promotes integrative agreement, it is important to learn more about the psychological processes that mediate and moderate this effect. Another related line of research would examine the application of the findings to other bargaining scenarios. One further future line of research should combine mental contrasting with planning strategies. Originality/value: The findings of the paper have implications for both self-regulation and negotiation research. The result that mental contrasting fosters integrative solutions reflects its potential to help negotiators effectively discriminate among feasible and unfeasible components of a multi-faceted goal (integrative agreement). For negotiation research, the paper identifies an effective self-regulatory strategy for producing high-quality agreements.

KW - Agreements

KW - Individual psychology

KW - Negotiating

KW - Targets

KW - Task analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80054011002&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80054011002&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/10444061111171341

DO - 10.1108/10444061111171341

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 324

EP - 341

JO - International Journal of Conflict Management

JF - International Journal of Conflict Management

SN - 1044-4068

IS - 4

ER -