Now you see it, now you don't

Interests, issues, and psychological distance in integrative negotiation

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6203424
AutoresMauro Giacomantonio (0000-0003-1114-6534, Sapienza University of Rome), Carsten K W De Dreu (0000-0003-3692-4611, University of Amsterdam), Lucia Mannetti (Sapienza University of Rome)
Ano2010
Volume98
Fascículo5
Páginas761-774
Data de publicação2010-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Personality and Social Psychology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0022-3514 • E-ISSN: 1939-1315
EditoraAmerican Psychological Association (APA) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1037/a0017879
PMID20438223
OpenAlexW2035960644
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas15
Referências citadas29

Negotiators are often advised to seek win-win agreements by focusing on interests (primary features) rather than issues (secondary features), but whether such advice is valid remains to be seen. Consistent with construal level theory (Y. Trope & N. Liberman, 2003), Experiments 1 and 2 show that negotiators focus on secondary features (issues) more than on primary features (interests) when psychological distance is low rather than high, and concomitant construal level is local and specific rather than global and abstract. Experiment 3 showed that high construal level promoted problem-solving behavior and therefore facilitated the achievement of win-win agreement, but only when integrative potential resided in underlying interests; when integrative potential resided in the issues, low construal level negotiators achieved higher joint outcomes. Thus, both low- and high-construal negotiators may achieve win-win agreements when such agreements require trade-offs at the level of issues, or at the level of underlying interests, respectively

Construal level theory · Negotiation · Political science · Trope (literature) · Conflict Management and Negotiation · Cultural Differences and Values · Law · Psychology · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology