The power and peril of first offers in negotiations: A conceptual, meta-analytic, and experimental synthesis

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Standard

The power and peril of first offers in negotiations: A conceptual, meta-analytic, and experimental synthesis. / Petrowsky, Hannes M.; Boecker, Lea; Escher, Yannik A. et al.
in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Jahrgang 191, 104448, 11.2025.

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{9f3cfb8c3dde42ce9d1c6434b1ffcc14,
title = "The power and peril of first offers in negotiations: A conceptual, meta-analytic, and experimental synthesis",
abstract = "Is it advantageous to make the first offer and to do so ambitiously? Although initial studies suggested clear advantages across cultures and contexts, recent findings have challenged the robustness of this first-mover advantage. A preregistered meta-analysis of 374 effects from 90 studies (Study 1; N = 16,334) revealed three beneficial effects of making the first offer: (a) a general first-mover advantage (g = 0.42, m = 80), (b) a positive correlation between first-offer magnitude and agreement value (r = 0.62, g = 1.56, m = 53), and (c) an advantage of ambitious (vs. moderate) first offers on agreement value (g = 1.14, m = 187). The meta-analysis also identified two detrimental outcomes of ambitious first offers: (d) fewer deals (i.e., more impasses; g = −0.42, m = 13) and (e) worse subjective value experienced by recipients (g = −0.40, m = 41). Two preregistered experiments (Study 2a-2b; N = 2,121) replicated both the beneficial and detrimental meta-analytic effects and simultaneously tested multiple psychological mechanisms driving these effects. Across the experiments, selective accessibility drove the effect of first-offer magnitude on counteroffers, while anger drove the effects on impasses and subjective value. Across both the meta-analysis and the experiments, negotiation complexity moderated both the beneficial and detrimental effects of first offers; as the number and type of issues (i.e., complexity) increased, the effects of first offers became smaller, and the mechanisms changed. Overall, the current meta-analysis and experiments collectively illuminate the direction, size, psychological pathways, and boundaries of first-offer effects in negotiations.",
keywords = "Anchoring, First offer, Meta-analysis, Negotiations, Robust variance estimation",
author = "Petrowsky, {Hannes M.} and Lea Boecker and Escher, {Yannik A.} and Frech, {Marie Lena} and Malte Friese and Galinsky, {Adam D.} and Brian Gunia and Lee, {Alice J.} and Michael Schaerer and Martin Schweinsberg and Meikel Soliman and Roderick Swaab and Troll, {Eve S.} and Marcel Weber and Loschelder, {David D.}",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2025 The Author(s)",
year = "2025",
month = nov,
doi = "10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104448",
language = "English",
volume = "191",
journal = "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes",
issn = "0749-5978",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The power and peril of first offers in negotiations: A conceptual, meta-analytic, and experimental synthesis

AU - Petrowsky, Hannes M.

AU - Boecker, Lea

AU - Escher, Yannik A.

AU - Frech, Marie Lena

AU - Friese, Malte

AU - Galinsky, Adam D.

AU - Gunia, Brian

AU - Lee, Alice J.

AU - Schaerer, Michael

AU - Schweinsberg, Martin

AU - Soliman, Meikel

AU - Swaab, Roderick

AU - Troll, Eve S.

AU - Weber, Marcel

AU - Loschelder, David D.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)

PY - 2025/11

Y1 - 2025/11

N2 - Is it advantageous to make the first offer and to do so ambitiously? Although initial studies suggested clear advantages across cultures and contexts, recent findings have challenged the robustness of this first-mover advantage. A preregistered meta-analysis of 374 effects from 90 studies (Study 1; N = 16,334) revealed three beneficial effects of making the first offer: (a) a general first-mover advantage (g = 0.42, m = 80), (b) a positive correlation between first-offer magnitude and agreement value (r = 0.62, g = 1.56, m = 53), and (c) an advantage of ambitious (vs. moderate) first offers on agreement value (g = 1.14, m = 187). The meta-analysis also identified two detrimental outcomes of ambitious first offers: (d) fewer deals (i.e., more impasses; g = −0.42, m = 13) and (e) worse subjective value experienced by recipients (g = −0.40, m = 41). Two preregistered experiments (Study 2a-2b; N = 2,121) replicated both the beneficial and detrimental meta-analytic effects and simultaneously tested multiple psychological mechanisms driving these effects. Across the experiments, selective accessibility drove the effect of first-offer magnitude on counteroffers, while anger drove the effects on impasses and subjective value. Across both the meta-analysis and the experiments, negotiation complexity moderated both the beneficial and detrimental effects of first offers; as the number and type of issues (i.e., complexity) increased, the effects of first offers became smaller, and the mechanisms changed. Overall, the current meta-analysis and experiments collectively illuminate the direction, size, psychological pathways, and boundaries of first-offer effects in negotiations.

AB - Is it advantageous to make the first offer and to do so ambitiously? Although initial studies suggested clear advantages across cultures and contexts, recent findings have challenged the robustness of this first-mover advantage. A preregistered meta-analysis of 374 effects from 90 studies (Study 1; N = 16,334) revealed three beneficial effects of making the first offer: (a) a general first-mover advantage (g = 0.42, m = 80), (b) a positive correlation between first-offer magnitude and agreement value (r = 0.62, g = 1.56, m = 53), and (c) an advantage of ambitious (vs. moderate) first offers on agreement value (g = 1.14, m = 187). The meta-analysis also identified two detrimental outcomes of ambitious first offers: (d) fewer deals (i.e., more impasses; g = −0.42, m = 13) and (e) worse subjective value experienced by recipients (g = −0.40, m = 41). Two preregistered experiments (Study 2a-2b; N = 2,121) replicated both the beneficial and detrimental meta-analytic effects and simultaneously tested multiple psychological mechanisms driving these effects. Across the experiments, selective accessibility drove the effect of first-offer magnitude on counteroffers, while anger drove the effects on impasses and subjective value. Across both the meta-analysis and the experiments, negotiation complexity moderated both the beneficial and detrimental effects of first offers; as the number and type of issues (i.e., complexity) increased, the effects of first offers became smaller, and the mechanisms changed. Overall, the current meta-analysis and experiments collectively illuminate the direction, size, psychological pathways, and boundaries of first-offer effects in negotiations.

KW - Anchoring

KW - First offer

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Negotiations

KW - Robust variance estimation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105016468394&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104448

DO - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104448

M3 - Journal articles

AN - SCOPUS:105016468394

VL - 191

JO - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

JF - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

SN - 0749-5978

M1 - 104448

ER -

DOI