Professor Jared Curhan, MIT Sloan School of Management. Vice Chair for Research, PON at Harvard Law School. Specializes in negotiation and social psychology. Address: Cambridge, United States
This research takes a new perspective on the longstanding mystery of personality in negotiation, ... more This research takes a new perspective on the longstanding mystery of personality in negotiation, which has been met with decades of null and inconsistent findings. Grounded in interactionist theories of personality, the investigation had two complementary phases. In the inductive phase (Study 1), the authors generated a list of fine-grained negotiation behavioral processes that have been explored in past work, and established which ones were consistent at the individual level from one encounter to the next. Examining the consistent behaviors that predicted negotiation performance, a major theme emerged: Asserting the Self. The deductive phase (Study 2) brought the investigation full circle into the realm of personality traits. Grounded in the inductive theme that emerged in Study 1, a cluster of lower-order personality factors was chosen, and these thematically-related traits were unusually strong predictors of negotiation performance. The higher-order big five personality traits were not similarly good predictors. We conclude that there are meaningful associations between personality and negotiation performance, particularly when examining theoretically-derived clusters of traits based on the behaviors that are both effective and consistent across individuals.
The first part of this paper traces a short history of the psychological study of negotiation. Al... more The first part of this paper traces a short history of the psychological study of negotiation. Although negotiation was an active research topic within social psychology in the 1960s and 1970s, in the 1980s, the behavioral decision perspective dominated. The 1990s has witnessed a rebirth of social factors in the psychological study of negotiation, including social relationships, egocentrism, motivated illusions, and emotion. The second part of this paper reviews five emerging research areas, each of which provides useful insight into how negotiators subjectively understand the negotiation: (a) mental models in negotiation; (b) how concerns of ethics, fairness, and values define the rules of the game being played; (c) how the selection of a communication medium impacts the way the game is played; (d) how cross-cultural issues in perception and behavior affect the negotiation game; and (e) how negotiators organize and simplify their understandings of the negotiation game when more than two actors are involved
This research takes a new perspective on the long-standing mystery of personality in negotiation,... more This research takes a new perspective on the long-standing mystery of personality in negotiation, which has seen decades of null and inconsistent findings. Grounded in interactionist theories defining personality as consistency in behaviors when placed multiple times in the same situation, the investigation examines consistency in individuals’ behavioral profiles across negotiation partners. Such consistency supports efforts to identify enduring dispositions that can predict objective and subjective outcomes. A comprehensive set of behaviors related to negotiation was coded in a round-robin study using groups of four negotiators who each took turns working with each other person. Analysis using Kenny’s Social Relations Model revealed evidence for extensive actor effects (indicating consistency in negotiators’ behavior), as well as moderate partner effects (indicating consistency in counterparts’ behavior) and dyadic reciprocity (indicating similarity in the behavior of negotiators a...
Researchers and practitioners highly encourage job candidates to negotiate their employment agree... more Researchers and practitioners highly encourage job candidates to negotiate their employment agreements. In our investigation, we challenge this unqualified advice to negotiate, and demonstrate that...
Historically, scholars and practitioners have asserted that criticism is harmful for group brains... more Historically, scholars and practitioners have asserted that criticism is harmful for group brainstorming. However, recent research has challenged this assumption, suggesting that criticism might ac...
Long-standing wisdom holds that criticism is antithetical to effective brainstorming because it i... more Long-standing wisdom holds that criticism is antithetical to effective brainstorming because it incites intragroup conflict. However, a number of recent studies have challenged this assumption, suggesting that criticism might actually enhance creativity in brainstorming by fostering divergent thinking. Our paper reconciles these perspectives with new theory and a multimethod investigation to explain when and why criticism promotes creativity in brainstorming. We propose that a cooperative social context allows criticism to be construed positively, spurring creativity without inciting intragroup conflict, whereas a competitive social context makes criticism more divisive, leading to intragroup conflict and a corresponding reduction in creativity. We found support for this theory from a field experiment involving 100 group brainstorming sessions with actual stakeholders in a controversial urban planning project. In a cooperative context, instructions encouraging criticism yielded more...
We examine the previously unstudied effects of silent pauses in bilateral negotiations. Two theor... more We examine the previously unstudied effects of silent pauses in bilateral negotiations. Two theoretical perspectives are tested-(a) an internal reflection perspective, whereby silence leads to a deliberative mindset, which, in turn, prompts value creation, and (b) a social perception perspective, whereby silence leads to intimidation and value claiming. Study 1 reveals a direct correlation between naturally occurring silent pauses lasting at least 3 s (extended silence) and value creation behaviors and outcomes. Study 2 shows that instructing one or both parties to use extended silence leads to value creation. Additional studies establish a mechanism for this effect, whereby negotiators who use extended silence show evidence of greater deliberative mindset (Study 3) and a reduction in fixed-pie perceptions (Study 4), both of which are associated with value creation. Taken together, our findings are consistent with the internal reflection perspective, whereby extended silence increases value creation by interrupting default, fixed-pie thinking, and fostering a more deliberative mindset. Findings of Study 3 also suggest a boundary condition whereby when status differences are salient, the use of silence by higher status parties leads to value creation, whereas the use of silence by lower status parties does not. Finally, Study 4 shows that instructing negotiators to use silence is more effective for value creation than instructing them to problem-solve. Challenging the social perception perspective that silence is a form of intimidation, we find no evidence for any associations between extended silence and the proportion of value claimed or subjective value of the counterpart. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
This research takes a new perspective on the longstanding mystery of personality in negotiation, ... more This research takes a new perspective on the longstanding mystery of personality in negotiation, which has been met with decades of null and inconsistent findings. Grounded in interactionist theories of personality, the investigation had two complementary phases. In the inductive phase (Study 1), the authors generated a list of fine-grained negotiation behavioral processes that have been explored in past work, and established which ones were consistent at the individual level from one encounter to the next. Examining the consistent behaviors that predicted negotiation performance, a major theme emerged: Asserting the Self. The deductive phase (Study 2) brought the investigation full circle into the realm of personality traits. Grounded in the inductive theme that emerged in Study 1, a cluster of lower-order personality factors was chosen, and these thematically-related traits were unusually strong predictors of negotiation performance. The higher-order big five personality traits were not similarly good predictors. We conclude that there are meaningful associations between personality and negotiation performance, particularly when examining theoretically-derived clusters of traits based on the behaviors that are both effective and consistent across individuals.
The first part of this paper traces a short history of the psychological study of negotiation. Al... more The first part of this paper traces a short history of the psychological study of negotiation. Although negotiation was an active research topic within social psychology in the 1960s and 1970s, in the 1980s, the behavioral decision perspective dominated. The 1990s has witnessed a rebirth of social factors in the psychological study of negotiation, including social relationships, egocentrism, motivated illusions, and emotion. The second part of this paper reviews five emerging research areas, each of which provides useful insight into how negotiators subjectively understand the negotiation: (a) mental models in negotiation; (b) how concerns of ethics, fairness, and values define the rules of the game being played; (c) how the selection of a communication medium impacts the way the game is played; (d) how cross-cultural issues in perception and behavior affect the negotiation game; and (e) how negotiators organize and simplify their understandings of the negotiation game when more than two actors are involved
This research takes a new perspective on the long-standing mystery of personality in negotiation,... more This research takes a new perspective on the long-standing mystery of personality in negotiation, which has seen decades of null and inconsistent findings. Grounded in interactionist theories defining personality as consistency in behaviors when placed multiple times in the same situation, the investigation examines consistency in individuals’ behavioral profiles across negotiation partners. Such consistency supports efforts to identify enduring dispositions that can predict objective and subjective outcomes. A comprehensive set of behaviors related to negotiation was coded in a round-robin study using groups of four negotiators who each took turns working with each other person. Analysis using Kenny’s Social Relations Model revealed evidence for extensive actor effects (indicating consistency in negotiators’ behavior), as well as moderate partner effects (indicating consistency in counterparts’ behavior) and dyadic reciprocity (indicating similarity in the behavior of negotiators a...
Researchers and practitioners highly encourage job candidates to negotiate their employment agree... more Researchers and practitioners highly encourage job candidates to negotiate their employment agreements. In our investigation, we challenge this unqualified advice to negotiate, and demonstrate that...
Historically, scholars and practitioners have asserted that criticism is harmful for group brains... more Historically, scholars and practitioners have asserted that criticism is harmful for group brainstorming. However, recent research has challenged this assumption, suggesting that criticism might ac...
Long-standing wisdom holds that criticism is antithetical to effective brainstorming because it i... more Long-standing wisdom holds that criticism is antithetical to effective brainstorming because it incites intragroup conflict. However, a number of recent studies have challenged this assumption, suggesting that criticism might actually enhance creativity in brainstorming by fostering divergent thinking. Our paper reconciles these perspectives with new theory and a multimethod investigation to explain when and why criticism promotes creativity in brainstorming. We propose that a cooperative social context allows criticism to be construed positively, spurring creativity without inciting intragroup conflict, whereas a competitive social context makes criticism more divisive, leading to intragroup conflict and a corresponding reduction in creativity. We found support for this theory from a field experiment involving 100 group brainstorming sessions with actual stakeholders in a controversial urban planning project. In a cooperative context, instructions encouraging criticism yielded more...
We examine the previously unstudied effects of silent pauses in bilateral negotiations. Two theor... more We examine the previously unstudied effects of silent pauses in bilateral negotiations. Two theoretical perspectives are tested-(a) an internal reflection perspective, whereby silence leads to a deliberative mindset, which, in turn, prompts value creation, and (b) a social perception perspective, whereby silence leads to intimidation and value claiming. Study 1 reveals a direct correlation between naturally occurring silent pauses lasting at least 3 s (extended silence) and value creation behaviors and outcomes. Study 2 shows that instructing one or both parties to use extended silence leads to value creation. Additional studies establish a mechanism for this effect, whereby negotiators who use extended silence show evidence of greater deliberative mindset (Study 3) and a reduction in fixed-pie perceptions (Study 4), both of which are associated with value creation. Taken together, our findings are consistent with the internal reflection perspective, whereby extended silence increases value creation by interrupting default, fixed-pie thinking, and fostering a more deliberative mindset. Findings of Study 3 also suggest a boundary condition whereby when status differences are salient, the use of silence by higher status parties leads to value creation, whereas the use of silence by lower status parties does not. Finally, Study 4 shows that instructing negotiators to use silence is more effective for value creation than instructing them to problem-solve. Challenging the social perception perspective that silence is a form of intimidation, we find no evidence for any associations between extended silence and the proportion of value claimed or subjective value of the counterpart. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Uploads