Open to Offers, but Resisting Requests: How the Framing of Anchors Affects Motivation and Negotiated Outcomes

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Open to Offers, but Resisting Requests: How the Framing of Anchors Affects Motivation and Negotiated Outcomes. / Majer, Johann Martin; Trötschel, Roman; Galinsky, Adam et al.
In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 119, No. 3, 09.2020, p. 582-599.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{e089963003974174b5ba9ec99ccdb652,
title = "Open to Offers, but Resisting Requests: How the Framing of Anchors Affects Motivation and Negotiated Outcomes",
abstract = "Abundant research has established that first proposals can anchor negotiations and lead to a first-mover advantage. The current research developed and tested a motivated anchor adjustment hypothesis that integrates the literatures on framing and anchoring and highlights how anchoring in negotiations differs in significant ways from standard decision-making contexts. Our research begins with the premise that first proposals can be framed as either an offer of resources (e.g., I am offering my A for your B) that highlights gains versus a request for resources (e.g., I am requesting your B for my A) that highlights losses to a responder. We propose that this framing would affect the concession aversion of responders and ultimately the negotiated outcomes. We predicted that when a first proposal is framed as an offer, the well-documented anchoring and first-mover advantage effect would emerge because offers do not create high levels of concession aversion. In contrast, because requests highlight what the responder has to give up, we predicted that opening requests would produce concession aversion and eliminate and even reverse the first-mover advantage. Across 5 experiments, the classic first-mover advantage in negotiations was moderated by the framing of proposals because anchor framing affected concession aversion. The studies highlight how motivational forces (i.e., concession aversion) play an important role in producing anchoring effects, which has been predominantly viewed through a purely cognitive lens. Overall, the findings highlight when and how motivational processes play a key role in both judgmental heuristics and mixed-motive decision-making.",
keywords = "Business psychology, Psychology, anchoring, concession aversion, first offers, framing, negotiations",
author = "Majer, {Johann Martin} and Roman Tr{\"o}tschel and Adam Galinsky and Loschelder, {David D.}",
year = "2020",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1037/pspi0000210",
language = "English",
volume = "119",
pages = "582--599",
journal = "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology",
issn = "0022-3514",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Open to Offers, but Resisting Requests

T2 - How the Framing of Anchors Affects Motivation and Negotiated Outcomes

AU - Majer, Johann Martin

AU - Trötschel, Roman

AU - Galinsky, Adam

AU - Loschelder, David D.

PY - 2020/9

Y1 - 2020/9

N2 - Abundant research has established that first proposals can anchor negotiations and lead to a first-mover advantage. The current research developed and tested a motivated anchor adjustment hypothesis that integrates the literatures on framing and anchoring and highlights how anchoring in negotiations differs in significant ways from standard decision-making contexts. Our research begins with the premise that first proposals can be framed as either an offer of resources (e.g., I am offering my A for your B) that highlights gains versus a request for resources (e.g., I am requesting your B for my A) that highlights losses to a responder. We propose that this framing would affect the concession aversion of responders and ultimately the negotiated outcomes. We predicted that when a first proposal is framed as an offer, the well-documented anchoring and first-mover advantage effect would emerge because offers do not create high levels of concession aversion. In contrast, because requests highlight what the responder has to give up, we predicted that opening requests would produce concession aversion and eliminate and even reverse the first-mover advantage. Across 5 experiments, the classic first-mover advantage in negotiations was moderated by the framing of proposals because anchor framing affected concession aversion. The studies highlight how motivational forces (i.e., concession aversion) play an important role in producing anchoring effects, which has been predominantly viewed through a purely cognitive lens. Overall, the findings highlight when and how motivational processes play a key role in both judgmental heuristics and mixed-motive decision-making.

AB - Abundant research has established that first proposals can anchor negotiations and lead to a first-mover advantage. The current research developed and tested a motivated anchor adjustment hypothesis that integrates the literatures on framing and anchoring and highlights how anchoring in negotiations differs in significant ways from standard decision-making contexts. Our research begins with the premise that first proposals can be framed as either an offer of resources (e.g., I am offering my A for your B) that highlights gains versus a request for resources (e.g., I am requesting your B for my A) that highlights losses to a responder. We propose that this framing would affect the concession aversion of responders and ultimately the negotiated outcomes. We predicted that when a first proposal is framed as an offer, the well-documented anchoring and first-mover advantage effect would emerge because offers do not create high levels of concession aversion. In contrast, because requests highlight what the responder has to give up, we predicted that opening requests would produce concession aversion and eliminate and even reverse the first-mover advantage. Across 5 experiments, the classic first-mover advantage in negotiations was moderated by the framing of proposals because anchor framing affected concession aversion. The studies highlight how motivational forces (i.e., concession aversion) play an important role in producing anchoring effects, which has been predominantly viewed through a purely cognitive lens. Overall, the findings highlight when and how motivational processes play a key role in both judgmental heuristics and mixed-motive decision-making.

KW - Business psychology

KW - Psychology

KW - anchoring

KW - concession aversion

KW - first offers

KW - framing

KW - negotiations

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85089125470&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/pspi0000210

DO - 10.1037/pspi0000210

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 31556681

VL - 119

SP - 582

EP - 599

JO - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

SN - 0022-3514

IS - 3

ER -

DOI

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Anmerkung zu BGH, Beschluss v. 20.05.2015 - 4 StR 555/14
  2. How do family entrepreneurs recognize opportunities?
  3. Warum brauchen wir eine Forschungsethik? Moralisches Entscheiden
  4. Einführung in das Logistik-Management
  5. Der Sprachverliebte
  6. Heuristics-in-use
  7. Inklusionsorientierte Lehrkräftebildung an der Leuphana Universität Lüneburg - Entwicklung und Implementation von Basisqualifikation und Profilstudium
  8. Filming Futures
  9. "Life with Uncle"
  10. The Holy Spirit, the church, and Christian unity, proceedings of the consultation held at the Monastery of Bose, Italy (14 - 20 October 2002)
  11. Digitale Medientechnologien
  12. The organizational a priori
  13. On the evidence for human use and control of fire at Schöningen
  14. The health consequences of child mental health problems and parenting styles
  15. Entgrenzung des künstlerischen Feldes durch Globalisierung ?
  16. Abgehoben und entkoppelt?
  17. When yielding pieces of the pie is not a piece of cake
  18. "Taking the pulse" of doctors and nurses to reduce pharmaceutical residues in the water cycle
  19. Modul Wie Gender in die Bildung kommt?!
  20. Emotional knowledge, emotional styles, and religion
  21. IMAGE: Development of a European curriculum for the training of prevention managers
  22. Merkmale guter Evaluation und Selbstevaluation
  23. The heterogeneous competitive effects of trade and foreign direct investment
  24. What patients value in physicians
  25. Arbitrating the Oceans: The Future of Inter-State Arbitration in the International Law of the Sea
  26. Relationaler Realismus?
  27. Conclusion: Independent local lists in East and West European countries
  28. Heterogenität, Inklusion und Sachunterricht: Beiträge der Hochschulbildung?
  29. Gewalt
  30. Krise der Kunstkritik?
  31. 12. Fachgespräch der Clearingstelle EEG "1. Novelle des EEG 2012"
  32. Willkommen, Mr. Chance