Five experiments document biases in the way people predict the outcomes of interdependent social situations. Participants predicted that situational constraints would restrain their own behavior more than it would the behavior of others, even in situations where everyone faced identical constraints. When anticipating the effects of deadlines on outcomes of negotiations, participants predicted that deadlines would hinder their performance more than it would hinder the performance of others. The results shed light on the psychological processes by which people predict the outcomes of and select strategies in strategic social interaction. They extend prior findings, such as people believing themselves to be below average on difficult tasks, to highly interdependent situations. Furthermore, the article shows both how focusing can account for these effects and also how perspective taking can reduce their biasing influence.
Ball, S. B., Bazerman, M. H., & Carroll, J. S. (1991). An evaluation of learning in the bilateral winner’s curse. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48, 1-22.
2.
Bazerman, M. H., & Carroll, J. S. (1987). Negotiator cognition. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 247-288). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
3.
Bazerman, M. H., Magliozzi, T., & Neale, M. A. (1985). Integrative bargaining in a competitive market. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35(3), 294-313.
4.
Becker, G. M., DeGroot, M. H., & Marschak, J. (1964). Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. Behavioral Science, 9, 226-232.
5.
Chen, M., & Bargh, J. A. (1997). Nonconscious behavioral confirmation processes: The self-fulfilling consequences of automatic stereotype activation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(5), 541-560.
6.
Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1985). Pragmatic reasoning schemas. Cognitive Psychology, 17(4), 391-416.
7.
Darley, J. M., & Batson, C. D. (1973). “From Jerusalem to Jerricho”: A study of situational and dispositional variables in helping behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 100-108.
8.
Dunbar, R. (1992). Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution, 20, 469-493.
9.
Galinsky, A. D., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2000). Perspective-taking: Decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4), 708-724.
10.
Gilbert, D. T., & Jones, E. E. (1986). Perceiver-induced constraint: Interpretations of self-generated reality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 269-280.
11.
Gilovich, T., Savitsky, K., & Medvec, V. H. (1998). The illusion of transparency: Biased assessments of others’ ability to read one’s emotional states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(2), 332-346.
12.
Girotto, V., Legrenzi, P., & Rizzo, A. (1991). Event controllability in counterfactual thinking. Acta Psychologica, 78(1-3), 111-133.
13.
Griffin, D. W., Dunning, D., & Ross, L. (1990). The role of construal processes in overconfident predictions about the self and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1128-1139.
14.
Jones, E. E., & Harris, V. A. (1967). The attribution of attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 3, 1-24.
15.
Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1972). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79-94). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
16.
Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93(2), 136-153.
17.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The simulation heuristic. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 201-208). New York: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Klar, Y., & Giladi, E. E. (1999). Are most people happier than their peers, or are they just happy?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(5), 585-594.
19.
Kruger, J. (1999). Lake Wobegon be gone! The “below-average effect” and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(2), 221-232.
20.
Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(2), 311-328.
21.
Messick, D. M., Moore, D. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1997). Ultimatum bargaining with a group: Underestimating the importance of the decision rule. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 87-101.
22.
Moore, D. A. (2004a). It pays to tell about your final deadlines: Time pressure, myopic prediction, and information exchange in negotiation. Unpublished manuscript, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
23.
Moore, D. A. (2004b). The unexpected benefits of final deadlines in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(1), 121-127.
24.
Moore, D. A. (2004c). Myopic prediction, self-destructive secrecy, and the unexpected benefits of revealing final deadlines in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 94(2), 125-139.
25.
Moore, D. A., & Kim, T. G. (2003). Myopic social prediction and the solo comparison effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(6), 1121-1135.
26.
Morris, M. W., Sim, D. L. H., & Girotto, V. (1998). Distinguishing sources of cooperation in the one-round prisoner’s dilemma: Evidence for cooperative decisions based on the illusion of control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34(5), 494-512.
27.
Nisbett, R. E., Caputo, C., Legant, P., & Maracek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(2), 154-164.
28.
Pietromonaco, P. R., & Nisbett, R. E. (1982). Swimming upstream against the fundamental attribution error: Subjects’ weak generalizations from the Darley and Batson study. Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 1-4.
29.
Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: Harper Collins.
30.
Regan, D. T., & Totten, J. (1975). Empathy and attribution: Turning observers into actors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(5), 850-856.
31.
Ross, L., Amabile, T. M., & Steinmetz, J. L. (1977). Social roles, social control, and biases in social-perception processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(485-494).
32.
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The false consensus effect: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 279-301.
33.
Safer, M. A. (1980). Attributing evil to the subject, not the situation: Student reaction to Milgram’s film on obedience. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 205-209.
34.
Schkade, D. A., & Kahneman, D. (1998). Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 9(5), 340-346.
35.
Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. (1978). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From social perception to social reality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(2), 148-162.
36.
Snyder, M., Tanke, E. D., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 656-666.
37.
Storms, M. D. (1973). Videotape and the attribution process: Reversing actors’ and observers’ points of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(2), 165-175.
38.
Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1975). Point of view and perceptions of causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(3), 439-445.
39.
Thompson, L. (1990). Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 515-532.
40.
Thompson, L. (1995). “They saw a negotiation”: Partisanship and involvement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(5), 839-853.
41.
Thompson, L., & Hastie, R. (1990). Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 98-123.
42.
Thompson, L., & Hrebec, D. (1996). Lose-lose agreements in interdependent decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 120(3), 396-409.
43.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207-232.
44.
Van Boven, L., Dunning, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2000). Egocentric empathy gaps between owners and buyers: Misperceptions of the endowment effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(1), 66-76.
45.
Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996). Egocentric interpretations of fairness in asymmetric, environmental social dilemmas: Explaining harvesting behavior and the role of communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(2), 111-126.
46.
Wason, P. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129-140.
47.
Wilson, T. D., Wheatley, T., Meyers, J. M., Gilbert, D. T., & Axsom, D. (2000). Focalism: A source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 821-836.
48.
Windschitl, P. D., Kruger, J., & Simms, E. (2003). The influence of egocentrism and focalism on people’s optimism in competitions: When what affects us equally affects me more. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 389-408.
49.
Word, C. O., Zanna, M. P., & Cooper, J. (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies in interracial interaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10(2), 109-120.
50.
Yukl, G. (1974). Effects of the opponent’s initial offer, concession magnitude and concession frequency on bargaining behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(3), 323-335.
