Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A literature review of cognitive biases in negotiation processes

A literature review of cognitive biases in negotiation processes Purpose – What is the discipline's current grasp of cognitive biases in negotiation processes? What lessons can be drawn from this body of literature? The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss the limited research on cognitive biases in the context of negotiations. Design/methodology/approach – This article reviews research from judgment and decision‐making, conflict management, psychology, and management literatures to systematize what we already know about cognitive biases in negotiations. Findings – Decision‐making studies have mainly identified 21 biases that may lead to lower quality decisions. Only five of those biases have been studied relating to negotiations: the anchoring, the overconfidence, the framing, the status quo and the self‐serving bias. Moreover, negotiation literature has identified five additional biases that affect negotiation processes: the fixed‐pie error, the incompatibility error, the intergroup bias, the relationship bias and the toughness bias. Biased behavior differs across cultures and emotional mood. Research limitations/implications – Implications for future research include building comprehensive models of how negotiators can overcome cognitive biases, studying interconnections between different biases, and increasing complexity of the studies to provide practitioners with more practical advice. Originality/value – The literature reviewed in this paper spans diverse disciplines and perspectives. This paper can be a starting point for researchers interested in understanding how cognitive biases affect negotiations. Moreover, it could be a starting point for future research on this field. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Conflict Management Emerald Publishing

A literature review of cognitive biases in negotiation processes

International Journal of Conflict Management , Volume 24 (4): 25 – Sep 27, 2013

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/a-literature-review-of-cognitive-biases-in-negotiation-processes-8qUwANMti0

References (112)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1044-4068
DOI
10.1108/IJCMA-08-2012-0064
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – What is the discipline's current grasp of cognitive biases in negotiation processes? What lessons can be drawn from this body of literature? The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss the limited research on cognitive biases in the context of negotiations. Design/methodology/approach – This article reviews research from judgment and decision‐making, conflict management, psychology, and management literatures to systematize what we already know about cognitive biases in negotiations. Findings – Decision‐making studies have mainly identified 21 biases that may lead to lower quality decisions. Only five of those biases have been studied relating to negotiations: the anchoring, the overconfidence, the framing, the status quo and the self‐serving bias. Moreover, negotiation literature has identified five additional biases that affect negotiation processes: the fixed‐pie error, the incompatibility error, the intergroup bias, the relationship bias and the toughness bias. Biased behavior differs across cultures and emotional mood. Research limitations/implications – Implications for future research include building comprehensive models of how negotiators can overcome cognitive biases, studying interconnections between different biases, and increasing complexity of the studies to provide practitioners with more practical advice. Originality/value – The literature reviewed in this paper spans diverse disciplines and perspectives. This paper can be a starting point for researchers interested in understanding how cognitive biases affect negotiations. Moreover, it could be a starting point for future research on this field.

Journal

International Journal of Conflict ManagementEmerald Publishing

Published: Sep 27, 2013

Keywords: Decision making; Negotiation; Bias; Cognition; Heuristic

There are no references for this article.