How Valid Is Negotiation Research Based on Student Sample Groups? New Insights into a Long-Standing Controversy

Herbst, Uta; Schwarz, Sabine

doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2011.00300.x

Cited by 46 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, we can be relatively confident that the college students in our sample have cognitive structures similar to those of business managers. Of course, we call for future studies to replicate our findings using samples that include real‐life managers or student negotiators with negotiation experience (Herbst & Schwarz, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

How to dissolve fixed-pie bias in negotiation? Social antecedents and the mediating effect of mental-model adjustment

Liu

Zhang

2015

J. Organiz. Behav.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryFixed-pie bias, defined as the erroneous belief that the other negotiation party's interest is directly opposite to one's own, has been a consistent hurdle that negotiators must overcome in their efforts to achieve optimal negotiation outcomes. In this study, we explore the underlying cognitive mechanism and the social antecedents of fixed-pie bias reduction in negotiation. Using data from a negotiation simulation with 256 participants, we found that mental-model adjustments made by negotiators could effectively decrease fixed-pie bias. More interestingly, we also found that negotiators were less likely to reduce fixed-pie bias when negotiating with an in-group member than with an out-group member but only under a high accountability condition. Finally, we found that mental-model adjustment mediated the effects of the aforementioned social antecedents (in-groupness and accountability) on reduced fixed-pie bias. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

How to dissolve fixed-pie bias in negotiation? Social antecedents and the mediating effect of mental-model adjustment

Liu

Zhang

2015

J. Organiz. Behav.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The participants were diverse professionals and students in negotiation and sustainability‐related fields from different world regions. Butler () demonstrated that the outcomes of student subjects matched those of experienced professionals and Herbst and Schwarz () confirmed that students trained in negotiation perform comparably well to professional negotiators. We collected data from 370 participants grouped into 74 teams of five participants at each negotiating table.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Taking Action to Reduce Waste: Quantifying Impacts of Model Use in a Multiorganizational Sustainability Negotiation

Czaika

Selin

2016

Negotiation Conflict Man Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We use a role-play simulation to examine how using quantitative models influences the process and outcome of sustainability negotiations. Our experimental approach involved 74 teams of five parties negotiating the details of a pilot test to compost and/or recycle used paper coffee cups. Approximately half of these negotiation teams were given a quantitative model-a life cycle assessment (LCA). We measured both negotiation process and outcome variables, in particular identifying favorable agreements-the mutually exclusive set of agreements that either minimized carbon dioxide emissions or maximized the parties' collective earned value. We found that most teams used a quantitative model; nearly half of those cocreated their own while negotiating. In our sample, teams that used a model, even those cocreating the model while negotiating, reached agreement more quickly than teams not using a model. Teams that cocreated the LCA reached a higher number of favorable agreements. We observed two dominant manners of model use: using the model to test alternatives while developing an agreement and verifying that a tentative agreement would sufficiently reduce carbon dioxide emissions. We conclude that using a quantitative model during a sustainability negotiation can help to increase the chances of obtaining a favorable agreement without lengthening the negotiation duration.

show abstract

“…With this considered, the study not only contributes to power in negotiation itself but also to the discussion as to whether student-based experiments are appropriate by applying the same negotiation task to a group of students and professional buyers. Herbst and Schwarz [34] have shown that untrained students are outperformed by experienced managers as well as trained students. While our experiment yields comparable evidence, the novelty lies in the negotiation setting.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternatives vs. Time – Measuring the Force of Distinct Sources of Bargaining Power

Dahlen

Eichstädt

2020

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to deepen the understanding of the drivers of bargaining power in negotiations and in particular the role of best alternatives (BATNA) and time pressure. Previous experimental negotiation research mainly focused on the power of BATNA and the influence of the context on the negotiation outcome, raising the question as to whether BATNA is indeed the only relevant power lever in negotiations. Especially game theorists have shown that time-related costs have a decisive influence on negotiation outcomes. The study proposes a framework to actually measure and compare the relevance and force of different power levers in a simulated distributive buyer-seller negotiation. The results suggest that time pressure can be as influential as an alternative; however, students and professionals seem to react differently to power manipulations. Whereas the student sample was significantly influenced by time pressure but not by alternatives, the opposite could be observed in the professional group. The findings question the common belief that alternatives are the key driver of power in negotiations.

show abstract

How Valid Is Negotiation Research Based on Student Sample Groups? New Insights into a Long-Standing Controversy

Cited by 46 publications

References 38 publications

How to dissolve fixed-pie bias in negotiation? Social antecedents and the mediating effect of mental-model adjustment

How to dissolve fixed-pie bias in negotiation? Social antecedents and the mediating effect of mental-model adjustment

Taking Action to Reduce Waste: Quantifying Impacts of Model Use in a Multiorganizational Sustainability Negotiation

Alternatives vs. Time – Measuring the Force of Distinct Sources of Bargaining Power

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About