Abstract
A central question in public conflict resolution is how to obtain better negotiation outcomes. Previous work in this area has mainly focused on objective outcome and has been limited to the comparison-based subjective outcome. The results of a scenario questionnaire and a laboratory simulated negotiation revealed two different mechanisms of forming subjective outcome of negotiation: one by comparing the profit with different criteria, and the other by assessing negotiators' feelings during the negotiation process. Mediation analysis, moderated mediation analysis, and moderation analysis verified that when comparison information was presented, the evaluation of negotiators' profit mediated the effect of negotiators' profit on subjective outcome. When the comparison information was not presented, negotiators' feelings during the process of negotiation predicted the subjective outcome of negotiation, and, simultaneously, negotiators could not evaluate their profit properly. The implication for negotiation subjective outcome, individual subjective well-being, and future direction was also discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.