This study examined whether an opponent's intentions during grievance negotiations can be accurately identified from the bargaining behavior of that person. A sample of 38 paired observations were collected from officials involved in teachers' grievance negotiations, 19 school principals and their respective union opponents. Results show assertive opponents' behaviors are good indicators of intentions, particularly when the dyad is of the same sex, whereas moderate behaviors are not.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnscombeG. E. M.Intention. Oxford, Eng.: Blackwell, 1957.
2.
BixenstineV. E.ChambersN.WilsonK. V.Effect of asymmetry in payoff on behavior in a two-person non-zero-sum game. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1964, 8, 151–159.
3.
DuaneM. J.The determinants of bargaining orientation for first-level grievance representatives at secondary buildings in Minnesota. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Minnesota., Minneapolis1984.
4.
DuvalS.DuvalV. H.Consistency and cognition: A theory of causal attribution. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum, 1983.
5.
HeiderF.The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
6.
JonesE. E.DavisK. E.From acts to dispositions. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 1965. Pp. 219–266.
7.
JonesE. E.GoethalsG. R.Order effects in impression formation: Attribution context and the nature of the entity. In JonesE.KanouseD.KelleyH.NisbettR.ValinsS.WernerB. (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press, 1972. Pp. 27–46.
8.
MaselliM. D.AltrocchiJ.Attribution of intent. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 71, 445–454.
9.
NisbettR. E.SchocterS.Cognitive manipulation of pain. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1966, 2, 227–236.
10.
OssorioP. G.DavisK. E.The self, intentionality, and reactions to evaluations. In GordonC.GergenK. (Eds.), The self in social interaction. Vol. 1. New York: Wiley, 1968. Pp. 355–369.
11.
RaiffaH.The art and science of negotiations. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard Univer. Press, 1982.
12.
RubleT. L.ThomasK. W.Support for a two-dimensional model of conflict behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, 16, 143–155.
13.
SingermanK. J.BorkoverT. D.BaronR. S.Failure of a misattribution therapy manipulation with a clinically relevant target behavior. Behavior Therapy, 1976, 7, 306–316.
ThomasK. W.KilmannR. H.Developing a forced-choice measure of conflict-handling behavior: The ‘MODE’ instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1977, 37, 309–325.
16.
ThomasK. W.PondyL. R.Toward an ‘intent’ model of conflict management among principal parties. Human Relations, 1977, 30, 1089–1102.
17.
WittgensteinL.Philosophical investigations. New York: Macmillan, 1958.
