De Dreu Carsten K W, Beersma Bianca, Stroebe Katherine, Euwema Martin C
Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2006 Jun;90(6):927-43. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.6.927.
The authors tested a motivated information-processing model of negotiation: To reach high joint outcomes, negotiators need a deep understanding of the task, which requires them to exchange information and to process new information systematically. All this depends on social motivation, epistemic motivation (EM), and their interaction. Indeed, when EM (manipulated by holding negotiators process accountability or not) was high rather than low and prosocial rather than proself, negotiators recall more cooperative than competitive tactics (Experiment 1), had more trust, and reached higher joint outcomes (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 showed that under high EM, negotiators who received cooperative, rather than competitive, tactics reached higher joint outcomes because they engaged in more problem solving. Under low EM, negotiators made more concessions and reached low joint outcomes. Implications for negotiation theory and for future work in this area are discussed.
为了达成高的联合结果，谈判者需要对任务有深入理解，这要求他们交换信息并系统地处理新信息。所有这些都取决于社会动机、认知动机（EM）及其相互作用。事实上，当EM较高（通过让谈判者承担过程责任与否来操纵）而非较低，且是亲社会而非利己时，谈判者回忆起的合作策略多于竞争策略（实验1），有更多信任，并达成更高的联合结果（实验2）。实验3表明，在高EM下，收到合作而非竞争策略的谈判者达成了更高的联合结果，因为他们进行了更多问题解决。在低EM下，谈判者做出了更多让步并达成了较低的联合结果。文中还讨论了该研究对谈判理论以及该领域未来工作的启示。
