|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Time Pressure and the Development of Integrative Agreements in Bilateral Negotiations
Peter J.D. Carnevale
Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Edward J. Lawler
Department of Sociology, University of Iowa
A laboratory experiment examined the effects of time pressure on the process and outcome of integrative bargaining. Time pressure was operationalized in terms of the amount of time available to negotiate. As hypothesized, high time pressure produced nonagreements and poor negotiation outcomes only when negotiators adopted an individualistic orientation; when negotiators adopted a cooperative orientation, they achieved high outcomes regardless of time pressure. In combination with an individualistic orientation, time pressure produced greater competitiveness, firm negotiator aspirations, and reduced information exchange. In combination with a cooperative orientation, time pressure produced greater cooperativeness and lower negotiator aspirations. The main findings were seen as consistent with Pruitt's strategic-choice model of negotiation.
Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 30, No. 4,
636-659 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002786030004003
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
V. Schei, J. K. Rognes, and C. K. W. De Dreu
Are Individualistic Orientations Collectively Valuable in Group Negotiations?
Group Processes Intergroup Relations,
July 1, 2008;
11(3):
371 - 385.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. K. W. De Dreu, B. A. Nijstad, and D. van Knippenberg
Motivated Information Processing in Group Judgment and Decision Making
Personality and Social Psychology Review,
February 1, 2008;
12(1):
22 - 49.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z. Ma
Chinese Conflict Management Styles and Negotiation Behaviours: An Empirical Test
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management,
April 1, 2007;
7(1):
101 - 119.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Schei and J. K. Rognes
Small Group Negotiation: When Members Differ in Motivational Orientation
Small Group Research,
June 1, 2005;
36(3):
289 - 320.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Giebels, C. K. W. de Dreu, and E. van de Vliert
No Way Out or Swallow the Bait of Two-Sided Exit Options in Negotiation: The Influence of Social Motives and Interpersonal Trust
Group Processes Intergroup Relations,
October 1, 2003;
6(4):
369 - 386.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. KELLERMANN and H. S. PARK
Situational Urgency and Conversational Retreat: When Politeness and Efficiency Matter
Communication Research,
February 1, 2001;
28(1):
3 - 47.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. M. O'Connor and P. J. Carnevale
A Nasty but Effective Negotiation Strategy: Misrepresentation of a Common-Value Issue
Pers Soc Psychol Bull,
May 1, 1997;
23(5):
504 - 515.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. K. W. De Dreu
Coercive Power And Concession Making in Bilateral Negotiation
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
December 1, 1995;
39(4):
646 - 670.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Druckman
Determinants of Compromising Behavior in Negotiation: A Meta-Analysis
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
September 1, 1994;
38(3):
507 - 556.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. C. King Jr. and T. D. Hinson
The Influence of Sex and Equity Sensitivity on Relationship Preferences, Assessment of Opponent, and Outcomes in a Negotiation Experiment
Journal of Management,
June 1, 1994;
20(3):
605 - 624.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Druckman
The Situational Levers of Negotiating Flexibility
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
June 1, 1993;
37(2):
236 - 276.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Wall Jr. and M. W. Blum
Negotiations
Journal of Management,
June 1, 1991;
17(2):
273 - 303.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
