Tandem Anchoring: Informational and Politeness Effects of Range Offers in Social Exchange

被引:46
作者
Ames, Daniel R. [1 ]
Mason, Malia F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Columbia Business Sch, New York, NY 10027 USA
关键词
social exchange; negotiation; first offers; anchoring; politeness; 1ST OFFERS; NEGOTIATION; POWER; ASSERTIVENESS; CONSEQUENCES; KNOWLEDGE; MODEL;
D O I
10.1037/pspi0000016
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
We examined whether and why range offers (e.g., "I want $7,200 to $7,600 for my car") matter in negotiations. A selective-attention account predicts that motivated and skeptical offer-recipients focus overwhelmingly on the attractive endpoint (i.e., a buyer would hear, in effect, "I want $7,200"). In contrast, we propose a tandem anchoring account, arguing that offer-recipients are often influenced by both endpoints as they judge the offer-maker's reservation price (i.e., bottom line) as well as how polite they believe an extreme (nonaccommodating) counteroffer would be. In 5 studies, featuring scripted negotiation scenarios and live dyadic negotiations, we find that certain range offers yield improved settlement terms for offer-makers without relational costs, whereas others may yield relationship benefits without deal costs. We clarify the types of range offers that evoke these benefits and identify boundaries to their impact, including range width and extremity. In addition, our studies reveal evidence consistent with 2 proposed mechanisms, one involving an informational effect (both endpoints of range offers can be taken as signals of an offer-maker's reservation price) and another involving a politeness effect (range offers can make extreme counteroffers seem less polite). Our results have implications for models of negotiation behavior and outcomes and, more broadly, for the nature of social exchange.
引用
收藏
页码:254 / 274
页数:21
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Pushing in the Dark: Causes and Consequences of Limited Self-Awareness for Interpersonal Assertiveness [J].
Ames, Daniel R. ;
Wazlawek, Abbie S. .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN, 2014, 40 (06) :775-790
[2]   Assertiveness Expectancies: How Hard People Push Depends on the Consequences They Predict [J].
Ames, Daniel R. .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 95 (06) :1541-1557
[3]   See what you want to see: Motivational influences on visual perception [J].
Balcetis, Emily ;
Dunning, David .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 91 (04) :612-625
[4]   Negotiation [J].
Bazerman, MH ;
Curhan, JR ;
Moore, DA ;
Valley, KL .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2000, 51 :279-314
[5]   Judgment accuracy and the asymmetric cost of errors in distributive bargaining [J].
Bottom, WP ;
Paese, PW .
GROUP DECISION AND NEGOTIATION, 1999, 8 (04) :349-364
[6]  
De Dreu C.K. W., 2007, Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles, V2nd, P608
[7]   Trust at Zero Acquaintance: More a Matter of Respect Than Expectation of Reward [J].
Dunning, David ;
Anderson, Joanna E. ;
Schloesser, Thomas ;
Ehlebracht, Daniel ;
Fetchenhauer, Detlef .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2014, 107 (01) :122-141
[8]   When effortful thinking influences judgmental anchoring: Differential effects of forewarning and incentives on self-generated and externally provided anchors [J].
Epley, N ;
Gilovich, T .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 2005, 18 (03) :199-212
[9]   THE PERSUASION KNOWLEDGE MODEL - HOW PEOPLE COPE WITH PERSUASION ATTEMPTS [J].
FRIESTAD, M ;
WRIGHT, P .
JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, 1994, 21 (01) :1-31
[10]   First offers as anchors: The role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus [J].
Galinsky, AD ;
Mussweiler, T .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2001, 81 (04) :657-669