• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

另一方的单方面让步:让步行为、归因与谈判判断。

Unilateral concessions from the other party: concession behavior, attributions, and negotiation judgments.

作者信息

Kwon Seungwoo, Weingart Laurie R

机构信息

Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

出版信息

J Appl Psychol. 2004 Apr;89(2):263-78. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.263.

DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.263
PMID:15065974
Abstract

This article examines the effects of the other party's concession behavior on a negotiator's satisfaction and judgments. The timing of the concessions (immediate, gradual, delayed) and the justifications provided by the other party (negotiator skill vs. external constraints) were manipulated using a scenario method (Study 1) and a role-playing experiment (Study 2). Study 1 showed that concession timing influenced valuation of the object and satisfaction with the partner and the outcome. Justifications about why the concession was made interacted with concession timing to influence participants' attributions. Participants' attributions for why the concession was actually made, in turn, had a main effect on satisfaction and judgments of the negotiation. Study 2 replicated some, but not all, of these findings.

摘要

本文考察了对方的让步行为对谈判者满意度和判断的影响。使用情景法(研究1)和角色扮演实验(研究2)来操纵让步的时机(即时、渐进、延迟)以及对方给出的理由(谈判技巧与外部限制)。研究1表明,让步时机影响对物品的估值以及对伙伴和结果的满意度。关于为何做出让步的理由与让步时机相互作用,影响参与者的归因。反过来,参与者对实际做出让步原因的归因,对谈判的满意度和判断产生主要影响。研究2重复了部分但并非全部这些发现。

相似文献

1
Unilateral concessions from the other party: concession behavior, attributions, and negotiation judgments.另一方的单方面让步:让步行为、归因与谈判判断。
J Appl Psychol. 2004 Apr;89(2):263-78. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.263.
2
A victim-centered approach to justice? Victim satisfaction effects on third-party punishments.以被害人为中心的司法途径?被害者满意度对第三方惩罚的影响。
Law Hum Behav. 2012 Oct;36(5):375-89. doi: 10.1037/h0093922. Epub 2012 Feb 20.
3
Hot or cold: is communicating anger or threats more effective in negotiation?热战还是冷战:在谈判中,表达愤怒或威胁更有效吗?
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Sep;96(5):1018-32. doi: 10.1037/a0023896.
4
Is there an "I" in "team"? The role of the self in group-serving judgments.“团队”一词中有“我”吗?自我在群体服务判断中的作用。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Jan;88(1):108-20. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.108.
5
Strategic consequences of emotional misrepresentation in negotiation: The blowback effect.谈判中情绪伪装的策略后果:反冲效应。
J Appl Psychol. 2016 May;101(5):605-24. doi: 10.1037/apl0000072. Epub 2015 Dec 14.
6
Understanding customer reactions to brokered ultimatums: applying negotiation and justice theory.理解客户对中介最后通牒的反应:运用谈判与公正理论。
J Appl Psychol. 2004 Jun;89(3):466-82. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.466.
7
Bridging the partisan divide: Self-affirmation reduces ideological closed-mindedness and inflexibility in negotiation.弥合党派分歧:自我肯定可减少谈判中的意识形态偏见和僵化。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Sep;93(3):415-30. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.415.
8
Judgments of personal responsibility for HIV infection: an attributional analysis.对艾滋病病毒感染个人责任的判断:归因分析
Soc Work. 1993 Jul;38(4):403-10.
9
Supplication and appeasement in conflict and negotiation: The interpersonal effects of disappointment, worry, guilt, and regret.冲突与谈判中的祈求与安抚:失望、担忧、内疚和遗憾的人际影响。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2006 Jul;91(1):124-42. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.124.
10
Procedural frames in negotiations: how offering my resources versus requesting yours impacts perception, behavior, and outcomes.谈判中的程序框架:提供我方资源与索取对方资源如何影响认知、行为及结果。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2015 Mar;108(3):417-435. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000009.

引用本文的文献

1
Buyers, Maybe Moving Second Is Not That Bad After All: Low-Power, Anxiety, and Making Inferior First Offers.买家们,也许后出价也并非那么糟糕:低权力感、焦虑情绪与给出较低的首次报价。
Front Psychol. 2021 May 31;12:677653. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.677653. eCollection 2021.