Effects of nine variables on compromising behavior and time to resolution were evaluated by a meta-analysis of published bargaining experiments reported over a 25-year period. The strongest effect sizes were obtained for the variables of negotiator's orientation, prenegotiation experience, time pressure, and the initial distance between positions. The orientation effect was particularly strong when it was communicated to bargainers by constituents or by the experimenter; the position distance effect was stronger for cognitive than for interest conflicts. Significantly weaker effect sizes were shown for opponent's concession strategy, representation, and accountability. The weakest effects occurred for the large versus small issues and visibility variables. These results challenge the assertion that group representation is a key determinant of competitive behavior in bargaining. Strong pressures on representatives to be accountable to their constituents did not increase the size of the effects. Analyses of differences in procedures used in the strongest and weakest effect size studies in each category suggest a number of conditions under which bargainers are likely to be intransigent.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Azar, E. E. , and J. W. Burton, eds. 1986. International conflict resolution: Theory and practice. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reiner.
2.
Bass, B. M. 1963. Effects on negotiators of their prior experience in strategy or study groups. Technical report 1 (Contract No. N ONR 624 [14]), Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh.
3.
Bass, B. M.1966. Effects on the subsequent performance of negotiators of studying issues or planning strategies alone or in groups. Psychological Monographs80 (6, whole no. 614).
4.
Bazerman, M. H. , T. Magliozzi, and M. A. Neale. 1985. Integrative bargaining in a competitive market. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes35:294-313.
5.
Bazerman, M. H. , and M. A. Neale. 1992. Negotiating rationally. New York: Free Press.
6.
Benton, A. A. 1972. Accountability and negotiations between group representatives. Proceedings of the 80th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, pp. 227-228.
7.
Benton, A. A.1975. Bargaining visibility and the attitudes and negotiation behavior of male and female group representatives. Journal of Personality43:661-677.
8.
Benton, A. A. , and D. Druckman. 1973. Salient solutions and the bargaining behavior of representatives and non-representatives. International Journal of Group Tensions3:28-39.
9.
Benton, A. A. , and D. Druckman. 1974. Constituent's bargaining orientation and intergroup negotiations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology4:141-150.
10.
Ben-Yoav, O. , and D. G. Pruitt. 1984. Accountability to constituents: A two-edged sword. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance34:283-295.
11.
Beriker, N. 1992. Negotiating styles of the minor parties in multilateral peace negotiations: Greece and Turkey at the Lausanne Peace Conference, 1922-23. Ph.D. diss., Institute of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University.
12.
Blake, R. R. , and J. S. Mouton. 1961a. Competition, communication, and conformity. In Conformity and deviation, edited by I. A. Berg and B. M. Bass. New York: Harper.
13.
Blake, R. R. , and J. S. Mouton. 1961b. Loyalty of representatives to in-group positions during intergroup competition. Sociometry24:177-183.
14.
Blake, R. R. , and J. S. Mouton. 1961c. Reactions to intergroup competition under win-lose conditions. Management Science7:420-435.
15.
Blake, R. R. , and J. S. Mouton. 1962. The intergroup dynamics of win-lose conflict and problem-solving collaboration in union-management relations. In Intergroup relations and leadership, edited by M. Sherif. New York: Wiley.
16.
Blake, R. R. , and J. S. Mouton. 1964. The managerial GRID: Key orientations for achieving production through people. Houston: Gulf.
17.
Blake, R. R. , and J. S. Mouton. 1989. Lateral conflict. In Productive conflict management, edited by D. Tjosvold and D. W. Johnson. Edina, MN: Interaction Books.
18.
Boyd, N. K. 1972. Negotiation behavior by elected and appointed representatives serving as group leaders or spokesmen under different cooperative group expectations. Ph.D. diss., University of Maryland.
19.
Breaugh, J. A. , and R. J. Klimoski. 1977. The choice of a group spokesman in bargaining: Member or outsider?Organizational Behavior and Human Performance19:325-336.
20.
Brehmer, B. , and K. R. Hammond. 1977. Cognitive factors in interpersonal conflict. In Negotiations: Social-psychological perspectives, edited by D. Druckman. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
21.
Brown, B. R.1970. Face-saving following experimentally induced embarrassment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology6:255-271.
22.
Brown, B. R. 1977. Face-saving and face-restoration in negotiation. In Negotiations: Social-psychological perspectives, edited by D. Druckman. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
23.
Carnevale, P. J. , and E. J. Lawler. 1986. Time pressure and the development of integrative agreements in bilateral negotiation. Journal of Conflict Resolution30:636-659.
24.
Carnevale, P.J. , D. G. Pruitt, and S. D. Seilheimer. 1981. Looking and competing: Accountability and visual access in integrative bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology40:111-120.
25.
Cohen, L. , M. E. Levine, and C. Plott. 1978. Communication and agenda influence: The chocolate pizza design. In Coalition forming behavior, edited by H. Sauermann. Tubingen, Germany: J. C. B. Mohr.
26.
Conrath, D. W.1970. Experience as a factor in experimental gaming behavior. Journal of Conflict Resolution14:195-202.
27.
Cooper, H. M.1979. Statistically combining independent studies: A meta-analysis of sex differences in conformity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology37:131-146.
28.
Cooper, H. M. 1989. Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29.
Deutsch, M. , D. Canavan, and J. Rubin. 1971. The effects of size of conflict and sex of experimenter upon interpersonal bargaining. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology7:258-267.
30.
Druckman, D.1967. Dogmatism, prenegotiation experience, and simulated group representation as determinants of dyadic behavior in a bargaining situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology6:279-290.
31.
Druckman, D.1968. Prenegotiation experience and dyadic conflict resolution in a bargaining situation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology4:367-383.
32.
Druckman, D.1970. Position change in cognitive conflict as a function of the cue-criterion relationship and the initial conflict. Psychonomic Science20:91-93.
33.
Druckman, D. eds. 1977. Negotiations: Social-psychological perspectives. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
34.
Druckman, D.1993. The situational levers of negotiating flexibility. Journal of Conflict Resolution37:236-276.
35.
Druckman, D. , and T. V. Bonoma. 1976. Determinants of bargaining behavior in a bilateralmonopoly situation II: Opponent's concession rate and similarity. Behavioral Science21:252-262.
36.
Druckman, D. , and B. J. Broome. 1991. Value differences and conflict resolution: Familiarity or liking?Journal of Conflict Resolution35:571-593.
37.
Druckman, D. , B. J. Broome, and S. H. Korper. 1988. Value differences and conflict resolution: Facilitation or delinking?Journal of Conflict Resolution32:489-510.
38.
Druckman, D. , and P. T. Hopmann. 1989. Behavioral aspects of negotiations on mutual security. In Behavior, society, and nuclear war, edited by P. E. Tetlock, J. L. Husbands, R. Jervis, P. C. Stern, and C. Tilly. New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
Druckman, D. , and R. M. Rozelle. 1975. Performance evaluation as a determinant of willingness to defend a counterattitudinal position. Social Behavior and Personality3:243-252.
40.
Druckman, D. , R. M. Rozelle, and K. Zechmeister. 1977. Conflict of interest and value dissensus: Two perspectives. In Negotiations: Social-psychological perspectives, edited by D. Druckman. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
41.
Druckman, D. , D. Solomon, and K. Zechmeister. 1972. Effects of representational role obligations on the process of children's distribution of resources. Sociometry35:387-410.
42.
Druckman, D. , K. Zechmeister, and D. Solomon. 1972. Determinants of bargaining behavior in a bilateral monopoly situation: Opponent's concession rate and relative defensibility. Behavioral Science17:514-531.
43.
Esser, J. K. , M. J. Calvillo, M. B. Scheel, and J. L. Walker. 1990. Oligopoly bargaining: Effects of agreement pressure and opponent strategies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology20:1256-1271.
44.
Freeberg, N. E. , and D. A. Rock. 1987. Development of a small group team effectiveness taxonomy based on meta-analysis. Final report to Office of Naval Research (Contract no. N00014-86-K-0334), Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.
45.
Frey, R. L. , and J. S. Adams. 1972. The negotiator's dilemma: Simultaneous ingroup and outgroup conflict. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology8:331-346.
46.
Glass, G. V. , B. McGaw, and M. L. Smith. 1981. Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
47.
Gruder, C. L.1971. Relations with opponent and partner in mixed-motive bargaining. Journal of Conflict Resolution15:403-416.
48.
Hammond, K. R.1965. New directions in research on conflict resolution. Journal of Social Issues21:44-66.
49.
Hammond, K. R. , F. J. Todd, M. Wilkins, and T. O. Mitchell. 1966. Cognitive conflict between persons: Application of the “lens model” paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology2:343-360.
50.
Hamner, W. C.1974. Effects of bargaining strategy and pressure to reach agreement in a stalemated negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology30:458-467.
51.
Harris, M. J. , and R. Rosenthal. 1985. Mediation of interpersonal expectancy effects: 31 meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin97:363-386.
52.
Hedges, L. V. , and I. Olkin. 1985. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
53.
Hermann, M. G. , and N. Kogan. 1968. Negotiation in leader and delegate groups. Journal of Conflict Resolution12:332-344.
54.
Johnson, D. W.1971. Effects of warmth of interaction, accuracy of understanding, and the proposal of compromises on listener's behavior. Journal of Counseling Psychology18:207-216.
55.
Johnson, D. W. , G. Maruyama, R. Johnson, D. Nelson, and L. Skon. 1981. Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin89:47-62.
56.
Kelley, H. H. , L. L. Beckman, and C. S. Fischer. 1967. Negotiating the division of a reward under incomplete information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology3:361-398.
57.
Klimoski, R. J.1972. The effects of intragroup forces on intergroup conflict resolution. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance8:363-383.
58.
Komorita, S. S. , and M. Barnes. 1969. Effects of pressures to reach agreement in bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology13:245-252.
59.
Korper, S. H. , D. Druckman, and B. J. Broome. 1986. Value differences and conflict resolution. Journal of Social Psychology126:415-417.
60.
Light, R. J. , and D. B. Pillemer. 1984. Summing up: The science of reviewing research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
61.
Lindskold, S. , P. S. Walters, and H. Koutsourais. 1983. Cooperators, competitors, and response to GRIT. Journal of Conflict Resolution27:521-532.
62.
Love, R. L. , R. M. Rozelle, and D. Druckman. 1983. Resolving conflicts of interest and ideologies: A simulation of political decision-making. Social Behavior and Personality11:23-28.
63.
Neale, M. A.1984. The effects of negotiation and arbitration cost salience on bargainer behavior: The role of the arbitrator and constituency on negotiator judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance34:97-111.
64.
Neale, M. A. , and M. H. Bazerman. 1985a. The effect of externally set goals on reaching integrative agreements in competitive markets. Journal of Occupational Behaviour6:19-32.
65.
Neale, M. A. , and M. H. Bazerman. 1985b. The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal28:34-40.
66.
Neale, M. A. , V. L. Huber, and G. B. Northcraft. 1987. The framing of negotiations: Contextual versus task frames. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes39:228-241.
67.
Neale, M. A. , and G. B. Northcraft. 1986. Experts, amateurs, and refrigerators: Comparing expert and amateur negotiators in a novel task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes38:305-317.
68.
Organ, D. W.1971. Some variables affecting boundary role behavior. Sociometry34:524-537.
69.
Pruitt, D. G. 1981. Negotiation behavior. New York: Academic Press.
70.
Pruitt, D. G. , and P. J. Carnevale. 1993. Negotiation in social conflict. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
71.
Pruitt, D. G. , P. J. Carnevale, B. Forcey, and M. Van Slyck. 1986. Gender effects in negotiation: Constituent surveillance and contentious behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology22:264-275.
72.
Pruitt, D. G. , and J. L. Drews. 1969. The effect of time pressure, time elapsed, and the opponent's concession rate on behavior in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology5:43-60.
73.
Randolph, L.1966. A suggested model of international negotiation. Journal of Conflict Resolution10:344-353.
74.
Rappoport, L.1965. Interpersonal conflict in cooperative and uncertain situations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology1:323-333.
75.
Rappoport, L.1969. Cognitive conflict as a function of socially-induced cognitive differences. Journal of Conflict Resolution13:143-148.
76.
Rosenthal, R.1979. The “file drawer” problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin86:638-641.
77.
Rosenthal, R. 1984. Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
78.
Rosenthal, R. 1990. An evaluation of procedures and results. In The future of meta-analysis, edited by K. W. Wachter and M. L. Straf. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
79.
Rozelle, R. M. , and D. Druckman. 1971. Role playing vs. laboratory deception: A comparison of methods in the study of compromising behavior. Psychonomic Science25:241-243.
80.
Sawyer, J. , and H. Guetzkow. 1965. Bargaining and negotiation in international relations. In International behavior: A social-psychological analysis, edited by H. C. Kelman. New York: Holt.
81.
Scholz, R. , A. Fleischer, and A. Bentpup. 1983. Aspiration forming and predictions based on aspiration levels compared between professional and nonprofessional bargainers. In Aspiration levels in bargaining and economic decision making, edited by R. Tietz. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
82.
Smith, D. L. , D. G. Pruitt, and P. J. Carnevale. 1982. Matching and mismatching: The effect of own limit, other's toughness, and time pressure on concession rate in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology42:876-883.
83.
Spector, B. I. 1993. Creativity in negotiation: Directions for research. Working paper 93-4, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
84.
Spilker, B.1993. Meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association269:3041-3041.
85.
Summers, D. A.1968. Conflict, compromise, and belief change in a decision-making task. Journal of Conflict Resolution12:215-221.
86.
Thibaut, J. , and C. Faucheux. 1965. The development of contractual norms in a bargaining situation under two types of stress. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology1:89-102.
87.
Thompson, L.1990. An examination of naive and experienced negotiators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology59:82-90.
88.
Vidmar, N.1971. Effects of representational roles and mediators on negotiation effectiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology17:45-58.
89.
Wachter, K. W. , and M. L. Straf, eds. 1990. The future of meta-analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
90.
Wall, J. A.1975. Effects of constituent trust and representative bargaining orientation in intergroup bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology31:1004-1012.
91.
Wall, J. A. , and A. Lynn. 1993. Mediation: A current review. Journal of Conflict Resolution37:160-194.
92.
Winham, G. R. 1977. Complexity in international negotiation. In Negotiation: Social-psychological perspectives, edited by D. Druckman. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
93.
Wolf, F. M. 1986. Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, series no. 07-059. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
94.
Yukl, G. A.1974. Effects of the opponent's initial offer, concession magnitude, and concession frequency on bargaining behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology29:327-330.
95.
Yukl, G. A. , M. P. Malone, B. Hayslip, and T. A. Pamin. 1976. The effects of time pressure and issue settlement order on integrative bargaining. Sociometry39:277-281.
96.
Zechmeister, K. , and D. Druckman. 1973. Determinants of resolving a conflict of interest: A simulation of political decision making. Journal of Conflict Resolution17:63-88.
97.
Zubek, J. M. , D. G. Pruitt, R. S. Pierce, N. B. McGillicuddy, and H. Syna. 1992. Disputant and mediator behaviors affecting short-term success in mediation. Journal of Conflict Resolution36:546-572.
