Negotiation occurs whenever people cannot achieve their own goals without the cooperation of others. Our review highlights recent empirical research that investigates this ubiquitous social activity. We selectively review descriptive research emerging from social psychology and organizational behavior. This research examines negotiation behavior and outcomes at five levels of analysis: intrapersonal, interpersonal, group, organizational, and virtual. At each level, we review research on negotiation processes and outcomes, and we discuss the implications of various processes and outcomes for the two functions of negotiation: value creation (integrative negotiation) and value claiming (distributive negotiation).

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an approach used in numerous professions that focuses attention on evidence quality in decision making and action. We review research on EBP implementation, identifying critical underlying psychological factors facilitating and impeding its use. In describing EBP and the forms of evidence it employs, we highlight the challenges individuals face in appraising evidence quality, particularly that of their personal experience. We next describe critical EBP competencies and the challenges underlying their acquisition: foundational competencies of critical thinking and domain knowledge, and functional competencies such as question formulation, evidence search and appraisal, and outcome evaluation. We then review research on EBP implementation across diverse fields from medicine to management and organize findings around three key contributors to EBP: practitioner ability, motivation, and opportunity to practice (AMO). Throughout, important links between psychology and EBP are highlighted, along with the contributions psychological research can make to further EBP development and implementation.

This research investigated the role of contemplation, conversation (conceptualized as social contemplation), and explanations in right-wrong decisions. Several theories suggest that contemplation or morally-oriented conversations will promote ethical decisions and that immediate choice or self-interested conversations will not; other theories suggest that individuals' explanations will reinforce their decisions. An experimental task tempting people to lie supported all of these predictions. In addition, truth-tellers viewed the situation as morally-oriented and non-truth-tellers viewed it as oriented around self-interest, both before and after their decisions. These findings provided the basis for a new, process model of moral decision making.

Three studies tested hypotheses predicting that Indian and American negotiators' propensity to trust accounts for their strategy, insight, and joint gains in negotiation. Study 1, a survey, documented that Indian negotiators trust their counterparts less than American negotiators. Study 2, a negotiation simulation, linked American and Indian negotiators' self-reported trust and strategy to their insight and joint gains. Study 3 replicated and extended Study 2 using independently-coded negotiation strategy data, allowing for stronger causal inferences. Overall, the strategy necessitated by Indian negotiators' low propensity to trust produced relatively poor outcomes. Our data support an expanded theoretical model of negotiation, linking culture and trust to strategies and outcomes. Our discussion suggests an approach that may help low-trust negotiators in general perform better.

No abstract