This study investigated attitudes toward the use of deception in negotiation, with particular attention to the distinction between deception regarding the informational elements of the interaction (e.g., lying about or misrepresenting needs or preferences) and deception about emotional elements (e.g., misrepresenting one's emotional state). We examined how individuals judge the relative ethical appropriateness of these alternative forms of deception, and how these judgments relate to negotiator performance and long-run reputation. Individuals viewed emotionally misleading tactics as more ethically appropriate to use in negotiation than informational deception. Approval of deception predicted negotiator performance in a negotiation simulation and also general reputation as a negotiator, but the nature of these relationships depended on the kind of deception involved.
The literature shows that offenders' subsequent crime location choices are affected by their prior crime location choices. However, the published studies have focused on the influence of time and place of a previous crime, without testing the impact of whether the offender was arrested during the act of the prior crime. On the basis of the literature, this study further examines the influence of the prior robbery experiences on the subsequent street robbery location choices, by testing explicit hypotheses on how the time, place, and being arrested in the act of previous robberies affect a robber's subsequent decisions of where to commit robberies. The data set used in this study includes 1262 detected robberies committed by 527 street robbers from the ZG City Public Security Bureau in China. Results of a mixed logit model demonstrate that prior street robbery experiences have a strong effect on subsequent street robbery location choices. A shorter time interval and less possibility of being arrested in the act of a prior street robbery significantly increase the likelihood of a robber returning to the previous location. However, the impact of distance of journey to prior crime location is not statistically significant.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.