Abstract
This paper reports on a study that examined the impact of computer presentation of suggested solutions during negotiation, in bargaining situations that can be characterized as integrative or distributive. It was found that in the integrative task, the bargainers achieved higher joint outcomes when presented with suggestions. They had a more negative perception of the negotiation atmosphere, however. In the distributive task, the suggestions did not help achieve joint gains, but it lessened negative attitudes of the bargainers. Bargainers who received suggestions felt both they and their partner had been somewhat more flexible, cooperative, considerate, and less suspicious. Thus, regardless of negotiation situation, the suggestions resulted in some benefit to the negotiators.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anson, R. and Jelassi, T.: 1990, ‘A Development framework for computer-supported conflict resolution’, European Journal of Operational Research, Special Issue on Group Decision and Negotiation Support Systems (forthcoming).
Balke, W. M., Hammond, K. R., and Meyer, G. D.: 1973, ‘An alternative approach to labor-management negotiations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 311–327.
Barclay, S. and Peterson, C.: 1976, ‘Multi-attribute utility models for negotiations’, Technical report 76–1. McLean, VA: Decisions and Designs, Inc.
Bartunek, J. M., Benton, A. A., and Keyes, C. B.: 1975, ‘Third party intervention and the bargaining behavior of group representatives’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 19, 532–557.
Bazerman, M. H., Magliozzi, T., and Neale, M.: 1985, ‘The acquisition of an integrative response in a competitive market’, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 34, 294–313.
Bazerman, M. H. and Neale, M.: 1982, ‘Improving negotiator effectiveness under final offer arbitration: The role of selection and training’, Journal of Applied Psychology 67, 543–548.
Bazerman, M. H. and Neale, M.: 1983, ‘Heuristics in negotiation: Limitations to effective dispute resolution’, in M. Bazerman and R. Lewicki (eds.), Negotiating in Organizations, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Brehmer, B.: 1986, ‘The role of judgment in small-group conflict and decision making’, in Hal R. Arkes and Kenneth R. Hammond (eds.), Judgment and Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Reader, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Brehmer, B. and Hammond, K. R.: 1977, ‘Cognitive factors in interpersonal conflict’, in D. Druckman (ed.), Negotiations: Social-Psychological Perspectives, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Brown, B. R.: 1970, ‘Face-saving following experimentally induced embarrassment’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 6, 255–271.
Cohen, J.: 1977, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, New York: Academic Press.
Foroughi, A. and Jelassi, T.: 1990, ‘NSS solutions to major negotiation stumbling blocks’, Proceedings of the 23rd Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, January 2–5 (forthcoming).
Hammond, K. R., Rohrbaugh, J., Mumpower, J. L., and Adelman, L.: 1977, ‘Social judgment theory: Applications in policy formation’, in M. F. Kaplan and S. Schwartz (eds.), Human Judgment and Decision Processes in Applied Settings, New York: Academic Press.
Hammond, K. R., Stewart, T. R., Brehmer, B., and Steinmann, D. O.: 1975, ‘Social judgment theory’, in M. F. Kaplan and S. Schwartz (eds.), Human Judgment and Decision Processes, New York: Academic Press.
Hiltrop, J. M. and Rubin, J. Z.: 1981, ‘Position loss and image loss in bargaining’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 25, 521–534.
Jelassi, T. and Foroughi, A.: 1989, ‘Negotiation support system: An overview of design issues and existing software’, Decision Support Systems: The International Journal, Special Issue on Group Decision Support Systems, 5, 167–181.
Mumpower, J., Schuman, S., and Zumbolo, A.: 1986, ‘Analytical mediation: an application in collective bargaining’, Unpublished paper. Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy, State University of New York at Albany.
Nash, J. F.: 1950, ‘The bargaining problem’, Econometrica 19, 155–162.
Neale, M. A.: 1984, ‘The effect of negotiation and arbitration cost salience on bargainer behavior: The role of arbitrator and constituency in negotiator judgment’, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 34, 97–111.
Neale, M. A. and Bazerman, M. H.: 1985a, ‘Perspectives for understanding negotiation: Viewing negotiation as a judgmental process’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 29, 33–55.
Neale, M. A. and Bazerman, M. H.: 1985b, ‘The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes’, Academy of Management Journal 28, 34–49.
Podell, J. E. and Knapp, W. M.: 1965, ‘The effect of mediation on the perceived firmness of the opponent’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 13, 511–520.
Pruitt, D. G. and Johnson, D. F.: 1970, ‘Mediation as an aid to face saving in negotiation’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 14(3), 239–246.
Raiffa, H.: 1982, The Art and Science of Negotiation, Cambridge MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press.
Siegel, S. and Castellan, N. J., Jr.: 1988, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ulvila, J. W.: 1979, ‘Decision with multiple objectives in integrative bargaining’, Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard University. Graduate school of business administration
von Winterfeldt, D. and Edwards, W.: 1986, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jones, B.H., Jelassi, M.T. The effect of computer intervention and task structure on bargaining outcome. Theor Decis 28, 355–374 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00162705
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00162705