PERCEPTION, COGNITION, AND EMOTION IN NEGOTIATION - En 6e C7 outline t

BASICS What   DEFINITION PERCEPTION PROCESS CHART Perception Stimulus Attention Recognition Transition Behavior PERCEPTUAL DISTORTION SELECTIVE PERCEPTION AND PROJECTION FRAMING TYPES OF FRAMES HOW FRAMES WORK INTERESTS, RIGHTS, AND POWER CHANGING FRAMES ADVICE ABOUT PROBLEM FRAMING COGNITIVE BIASES IRRATIONAL ESCALATION OF COMMITMENT AND MYTHICAL FIXED-PIE BELIEFS ANCHORING AND ADJUSTMENT AND ISSUE FRAMING AND RISK AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION AND THE WINNER'S CURSE OVERCONFIDENCE AND THE LAW OF SMALL NUMBERS SELF-SERVING BIASES AND ENDOWMENT EFFECT IGNORING OTHERS' COGNITIONS AND REACTIVE DEVALUATION MANAGING MISPERCEPTIONS AND COGNITIVE BIASES IN NEGOTIATION

PERCEPTION, COGNITION, AND EMOTION IN NEGOTIATION The basic building blocks of all social encounters are: Perception Cognition    Framing    Cognitive biases Emotion Perception defined: The process by which individuals connect to                           their environment. A complex physical and psychological processA "sense-making" process Perception The process of ascribing meaning to messages and events is strongly influenced by the perceiver's current state of mind, role, and comprehension of earlier communications. -             People interpret their environment in order to respond appropriately -             The complexity of environments makes it impossible to process all of the information - People develop shortcuts to process information and these shortcuts create perceptual errors PERCEPTUAL DISTORTION • Four major perceptual errors: ■           Stereotyping ■           Halo effects ■           Selective perception ■           Projection Selective perception: ■           Perpetuates stereotypes or halo effects ■           The perceiver singles out information that supports a prior belief but filters out contrary information Projection: ■           Arises out of a need to protect one's own self-concept ■           People assign to others the characteristics or feelings that they possess themselves FRAMING Frames: ■           Represent the subjective mechanism through which people evaluate and make sense out of situations ■           Lead people to pursue or avoid subsequent actions ■           Focus, shape and organize the world around us ■           Make sense of complex realities ■           Define a person, event or process ■           Impart meaning and significance TYPES OF FRAMES •Substantive •Outcome •Aspiration •Process •Identity •Characterization •Loss-Gain HOW FRAMES WORK IN NEGOTIATION •Negotiators can use more than one frame •Mismatches in frames between parties are sources of conflict •Particular types of frames may lead to particular types of arguments •Specific frames may be likely to be used with certain types of issues •Parties are likely to assume a particular frame because of various factors INTERESTS, RIGHTS, AND POWER Parties in conflict use one of three frames: •  Interests: people talk about their "positions" but often what is at stake is their underlying interests •  Rights: people may be concerned about who is "right" - that is, who has legitimacy, who is correct, and what is fair •  Power: people may wish to resolve a conflict on the basis of who is stronger THE FRAME OF AN ISSUE CHANGES AS THE NEGOTIATION EVOLVES                                                                     Negotiators tend to argue for stock issues or concerns that are raised every time the parties negotiate                                                                     Each party attempts to make the best possible case for his or her preferred position or perspective                                                                     Frames may define major shifts and transitions in a complex overall negotiation                                                                     Multiple agenda items operate to shape issue development SOME ADVICE ABOUT PROBLEM FRAMING FOR NEGOTIATORS •Frames shape what the parties define as the key issues and how they talk about them Both parties have frames Frames are controllable, at least to some degree Conversations change and transform frames in ways negotiators may not be able to predict but may be able to control Certain frames are more likely than others to lead to certain types of processes and outcomes COGNITIVE BIASES                                                                     Irrational escalation of commitment Mythical fixed-pie beliefs Anchoring and adjustment Issue framing and risk Availability of information The winner's curse Overconfidence The law of small numbers Self-serving biases Endowment effect Ignoring others' cognitions Reactive devaluation IRRATIONAL ESCALATION OF COMMITMENT AND MYTHICAL FIXED-PIE BELIEFS Irrational escalation of commitment    Negotiators maintain commitment to a course of action even when that commitment constitutes irrational behavior Mythical fixed-pie beliefs     Negotiators assume that all negotiations (not just some) involve a fixed pie ANCHORING AND ADJUSTMENT AND ISSUE FRAMING AND RISK Anchoring and adjustment     The effect of the standard (anchor) against which subsequent adjustments (gains or losses) are measured    The anchor might be based on faulty or incomplete information, thus be misleading Issue framing and risk    Frames can lead people to seek, avoid, or be neutral about risk in decision making and negotiation AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION AND THE WINNER'S CURSE Availability of information    Operates when information that is presented in vivid or attention-getting ways becomes easy to recall.    Becomes central and critical in evaluating events and options The winner's curse    The tendency to settle quickly on an item and then subsequently feel discomfort about a win that comes too easily OVERCONFIDENCE AND THE LAW OF SMALL NUMBERS •Overconfidence     The tendency of negotiators to believe that their ability to be correct or accurate is greater than is actually true    The law of small numbers    The tendency of people to draw conclusions from small sample sizes    The smaller sample, the greater the possibility that past lessons will be erroneously used to infer what will happen in the future                                | SELF-SERVING BIASES AND ENDOWMENT EFFECT Self-serving biases    People often explain another person's behavior by making attributions, either to the person or to the situation    The tendency, known as fundamental attribution error, is to:       Overestimate the role of personal or internal factors       Underestimate the role of situational or external factors Endowment effect    The tendency to overvalue something you own or believe you possess IGNORING OTHERS' COGNITIONS AND REACTIVE DEVALUATION Ignoring others' cognitions      Negotiators don't bother to ask about the other party's perceptions and thoughts      This leaves them to work with incomplete information, and thus produces faulty results Reactive devaluation      The process of devaluing the other party's concessions simply because the other party made them MANAGING MISPERCEPTIONS AND COGNITIVE BIASES IN NEGOTIATION The best advice that negotiators can follow is:      Be aware of the negative aspects of these biases       Discuss them in a structured manner within the team and with counterparts MOOD, EMOTION, AND NEGOTIATION      The distinction between mood and emotion is based on three characteristics:           Specificity           Intensity           Duration Negotiations create both positive and negative emotions      Positive emotions generally have positive consequences for negotiations      They are more likely to lead the parties toward more integrative processes      They also create a positive attitude toward the other side      They promote persistence      They set the stage for successful subsequent negotiations Aspects of the negotiation process can lead to positive emotions      Positive feelings result from fair procedures during negotiation      Positive feelings result from favorable social comparison • Negative emotions generally have negative consequences for negotiations      They may lead parties to define the situation as competitive or distributive      They may undermine a negotiator's ability to analyze the situation accurately, which adversely affects individual outcomes                                      They may lead parties to escalate the conflict      They may lead parties to retaliate and may thwart integrative outcomes Aspects of the negotiation process can lead to negative emotions      Negative emotions may result from a competitive mind-set      Negative emotions may result from an impasse      Negative emotions may result from the prospect of beginning a negotiation Effects of positive and negative emotion      Positive emotions may generate negative outcomes      Negative feelings may elicit beneficial outcomes Emotions can be used strategically as    [ negotiation gambits