1. //
  2. Start
  3. //
  4. Publikationen
  5. Bargaining zone distortion in negotiatio...
  6. Formate
  7. //

Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations: The elusive power of multiple alternatives

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Standard

Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations : The elusive power of multiple alternatives. / Schaerer, Michael; Loschelder, David D.; Swaab, Roderick I.

in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Jahrgang 137, 01.11.2016, S. 156-171.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Harvard

Schaerer, M, Loschelder, DD & Swaab, RI 2016, 'Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations: The elusive power of multiple alternatives', Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Jg. 137, S. 156-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.09.001

APA

Schaerer, M., Loschelder, D. D., & Swaab, R. I. (2016). Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations: The elusive power of multiple alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 137, 156-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.09.001

Vancouver

Schaerer M, Loschelder DD, Swaab RI. Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations: The elusive power of multiple alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2016 Nov 1;137:156-171. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.09.001

Bibtex

@article{b20f00d60ddd4dd78cb9747c015175d6,
title = "Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations: The elusive power of multiple alternatives",
abstract = "We challenge the assumption that having multiple alternatives is always better than a single alternative by showing that negotiators who have additional alternatives ironically exhibit downward-biased perceptions of their own and their opponent's reservation price, make lower demands, and achieve worse outcomes in distributive negotiations. Five studies demonstrate that the apparent benefits of multiple alternatives are elusive because multiple alternatives led to less ambitious first offers (Studies 1–2) and less profitable agreements (Study 3). This distributive disadvantage emerged because negotiators{\textquoteright} perception of the bargaining zone was more distorted when they had additional (less attractive) alternatives than when they only had a single alternative (Studies 1–3). We further found that this multiple-alternatives disadvantage only emerges when negotiators used quantitative (versus qualitative) evaluation standards to gauge the extremity of their offers (Study 4), and when they base their offers on their own numerical alternative(s) versus on opponent information (Study 5).",
keywords = "Business psychology, Alternatives, Anchoring, Bargaining zone, BATNA, First offer, Multiple alternatives, Negotiations, Power, Scale distortion",
author = "Michael Schaerer and Loschelder, {David D.} and Swaab, {Roderick I.}",
year = "2016",
month = nov,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.09.001",
language = "English",
volume = "137",
pages = "156--171",
journal = "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes",
issn = "0749-5978",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations

T2 - The elusive power of multiple alternatives

AU - Schaerer, Michael

AU - Loschelder, David D.

AU - Swaab, Roderick I.

PY - 2016/11/1

Y1 - 2016/11/1

N2 - We challenge the assumption that having multiple alternatives is always better than a single alternative by showing that negotiators who have additional alternatives ironically exhibit downward-biased perceptions of their own and their opponent's reservation price, make lower demands, and achieve worse outcomes in distributive negotiations. Five studies demonstrate that the apparent benefits of multiple alternatives are elusive because multiple alternatives led to less ambitious first offers (Studies 1–2) and less profitable agreements (Study 3). This distributive disadvantage emerged because negotiators’ perception of the bargaining zone was more distorted when they had additional (less attractive) alternatives than when they only had a single alternative (Studies 1–3). We further found that this multiple-alternatives disadvantage only emerges when negotiators used quantitative (versus qualitative) evaluation standards to gauge the extremity of their offers (Study 4), and when they base their offers on their own numerical alternative(s) versus on opponent information (Study 5).

AB - We challenge the assumption that having multiple alternatives is always better than a single alternative by showing that negotiators who have additional alternatives ironically exhibit downward-biased perceptions of their own and their opponent's reservation price, make lower demands, and achieve worse outcomes in distributive negotiations. Five studies demonstrate that the apparent benefits of multiple alternatives are elusive because multiple alternatives led to less ambitious first offers (Studies 1–2) and less profitable agreements (Study 3). This distributive disadvantage emerged because negotiators’ perception of the bargaining zone was more distorted when they had additional (less attractive) alternatives than when they only had a single alternative (Studies 1–3). We further found that this multiple-alternatives disadvantage only emerges when negotiators used quantitative (versus qualitative) evaluation standards to gauge the extremity of their offers (Study 4), and when they base their offers on their own numerical alternative(s) versus on opponent information (Study 5).

KW - Business psychology

KW - Alternatives

KW - Anchoring

KW - Bargaining zone

KW - BATNA

KW - First offer

KW - Multiple alternatives

KW - Negotiations

KW - Power

KW - Scale distortion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84989322247&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.09.001

DO - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.09.001

M3 - Journal articles

AN - SCOPUS:84989322247

VL - 137

SP - 156

EP - 171

JO - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

JF - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

SN - 0749-5978

ER -

In der gleichen Zeitschrift

On the trajectory of discrimination: A meta-analysis and forecasting survey capturing 44 years of field experiments on gender and hiring decisions

Gender Audits Forecasting Collaboration, Schaerer, M., Plessis, C. D., Nguyen, M. H. B., Aert, R. C. M. V., Tiokhin, L., Lakens, D., Clemente, E. G., Pfeiffer, T., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., Clark, C. J. & Siem, B., 01.11.2023, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 179, 26 S., 104280.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

How organizational actors live out paradoxical tensions through power relations: The case of a youth prison

Wenzel, M., Koch, J., Cornelissen, J. P., Rothmann, W. & Senf, N. N., 01.11.2019, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 155, S. 55-67 13 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Too precise to pursue: How precise first offers create barriers-to-entry in negotiations and markets

Lee, A. J., Loschelder, D. D., Schweinsberg, M., Mason, M. F. & Galinsky, A. D., 01.09.2018, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 148, S. 87-100 14 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Weitere Publikationen dieser Person(en)

Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries

Vlasceanu, M., Doell, K. C., Bak-Coleman, J. B., Todorova, B., Berkebile-Weinberg, M. M., Grayson, S. J., Patel, Y., Goldwert, D., Pei, Y., Chakroff, A., Pronizius, E., Broek, K. L. V. D., Vlasceanu, D., Constantino, S., Morais, M. J., Schumann, P., Rathje, S., Fang, K., Aglioti, S. M., Alfano, M., Alvarado-Yepez, A. J., Andersen, A., Anseel, F., Apps, M. A. J., Asadli, C., Awuor, F. J., Azevedo, F., Basaglia, P., Bélanger, J. J., Berger, S., Bertin, P., Białek, M., Bialobrzeska, O., Blaya-Burgo, M., Bleize, D. N. M., Bø, S., Boecker, L., Boggio, P. S., Borau, S., Bos, B., Bouguettaya, A., Brauer, M., Brick, C., Brik, T., Briker, R., Brosch, T., Buchel, O., Buonauro, D., Butalia, R., Carvacho, H., Chamberlain, S. A. E., Chan, H-Y., Chow, D., Chung, D., Cian, L., Cohen-Eick, N., Contreras-Huerta, L. S., Contu, D., Cristea, V., Cutler, J., D'Ottone, S., Keersmaecker, J. D., Delcourt, S., Delouvée, S., Diel, K., Douglas, B. D., Drupp, M. A., Dubey, S., Ekmanis, J., Elbaek, C. T., Elsherif, M., Engelhard, I. M., Escher, Y. A., Etienne, T. W., Farage, L., Farias, A. R., Feuerriegel, S., Findor, A., Freira, L., Friese, M., Gains, N. P., Gallyamova, A., Geiger, S. J., Genschow, O., Gjoneska, B., Gkinopoulos, T., Goldberg, B., Goldenberg, A., Gradidge, S., Grassini, S., Gray, K., Grelle, S., Griffin, S. M., Grigoryan, L., Grigoryan, A., Grigoryev, D., Gruber, J., Guilaran, J., Hadar, B., Hahnel, U. J. J., Halperin, E., Harvey, A. J., Haugestad, C. A. P., Herman, A. M., Hershfield, H. E., Himichi, T., Hine, D. W., Hofmann, W., Howe, L., Huaman-Chulluncuy, E. T., Huang, G., Ishii, T., Ito, A., Jia, F., Jost, J. T., Jovanović, V., Jurgiel, D., Kácha, O., Kankaanpää, R., Kantorowicz, J., Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, E., Mintz, K. K., Kaya, I., Kaya, O., Khachatryan, N., Klas, A., Klein, C., Klöckner, C. A., Koppel, L., Kosachenko, A. I., Kothe, E. J., Krebs, R., Krosch, A. R., Krouwel, A. P. M., Kyrychenko, Y., Lagomarsino, M., Lamm, C., Lange, F., Cunningham, J. L., Lees, J., Leung, T. Y., Levy, N., Lockwood, P. L., Longoni, C., Ortega, A. L., Loschelder, D. D., Lu, J. G., Luo, Y., Luomba, J., Lutz, A. E., Majer, J. M., Markowitz, E., Marsh, A. A., Mascarenhas, K. L., Mbilingi, B., Mbungu, W., McHugh, C., Meijers, M. H. C., Mercier, H., Mhagama, F. L., Michalakis, K., Mikus, N., Milliron, S., Mitkidis, P., Monge-Rodríguez, F. S., Mora, Y. L., Moreau, D., Motoki, K., Moyano, M., Mus, M., Navajas, J., Nguyen, T. L., Nguyen, D. M., Nguyen, T., Niemi, L., Nijssen, S. R. R., Nilsonne, G., Nitschke, J. P., Nockur, L., Okura, R., Öner, S., Özdoğru, A. A., Palumbo, H., Panagopoulos, C., Panasiti, M. S., Pärnamets, P., Paruzel-Czachura, M., Pavlov, Y. G., Payán-Gómez, C., Pearson, A. R., Costa, L. P. D., Petrowsky, H. M., Pfattheicher, S., Pham, N. T., Ponizovskiy, V., Pretus, C., Rêgo, G. G., Reimann, R., Rhoads, S. A., Riano-Moreno, J., Richter, I., Röer, J. P., Rosa-Sullivan, J., Ross, R. M., Sabherwal, A., Saito, T., Sarrasin, O., Say, N., Schmid, K., Schmitt, M. T., Schoenegger, P., Scholz, C., Schug, M. G., Schulreich, S., Shreedhar, G., Shuman, E., Sivan, S., Sjåstad, H., Soliman, M., Soud, K., Spampatti, T., Sparkman, G., Spasovski, O., Stanley, S. K., Stern, J. A., Strahm, N., Suko, Y., Sul, S., Syropoulos, S., Taylor, N. C., Tedaldi, E., Tinghög, G., Huynh, L. D. T., Travaglino, G. A., Tsakiris, M., Tüter, İ., Tyrala, M., Uluğ, Ö. M., Urbanek, A., Valko, D., Linden, S. V. D., Schie, K. V., Stekelenburg, A. V., Vanags, E., Västfjäll, D., Vesely, S., Vintr, J., Vranka, M., Wanguche, P. O., Willer, R., Wojcik, A. D., Xu, R., Yadav, A., Zawisza, M., Zhao, X., Zhao, J., Żuk, D. & Bavel, J. J. V., 09.02.2024, in: Science Advances. 10, 6, 19 S., eadj5778.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

A meta‐analysis on the effects of just‐below versus round prices

Troll, E. S., Frankenbach, J., Friese, M. & Loschelder, D. D., 21.05.2023, (Elektronische Veröffentlichung vor Drucklegung) in: Journal of Consumer Psychology. 27 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

The Too-Much-Mimicry Effect: Strong (vs. Subtle) Mimicry Impairs Liking and Trust in Distributive Negotiations

Wessler, J., Loschelder, D. D., Fendel, J. C. & Friese, M., 2023, (Angenommen/Im Druck) in: Journal of Nonverbal Behavior.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Understanding the first-offer conundrum: How buyer offers impact sale price and impasse risk in 26 million eBay negotiations

Schweinsberg, M., Petrowsky, H. M., Funk, B. & Loschelder, D. D., 01.08.2023, in: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA). 120, 32, e2218582120.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Virtuelle Realitäten zur Kompetenzentwicklung und Reflexion in der universitären Lehrkräftebildung am Beispiel von Elterngesprächen

Adam, Y., Petrowsky, H., Loschelder, D. D. & Kuhl, P., 22.11.2023, Digitales Lehren und Lernen im Fachunterricht: Aktuelle Entwicklungen, Gegenstände und Prozesse. Ahlers, M., Besser, M., Herzog, C. & Kuhl, P. (Hrsg.). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa Verlag, S. 222-242 21 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Sammelwerken › Aufsätze in Sammelwerken › Forschung

Dokumente

DOI