Advanced search

Promoting integrative bargaining: mental contrasting with implementation intentions

Dan Kirk (Psychology Department, New York University, New York, New York, USA)
Gabriele Oettingen (Psychology Department, New York University, New York, New York, USA, and University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany)
Peter M. Gollwitzer (Psychology Department, New York University, New York, New York, USA, and University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany)

International Journal of Conflict Management

ISSN: 1044-4068

Publication date: 19 April 2013

Abstract

Purpose

–

The present experiment aimed to test the impact of a self‐regulatory strategy of goal pursuit – called mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII) – on an integrative bargaining task.

Design/methodology/approach

–

Participants were randomly assigned to dyads and negotiated over the sale of a car. Before negotiating, participants were prompted to engage in MCII, or one or the other of its two component strategies: to contrast mentally achieving success in the integrative bargaining task with the reality standing in the way of this success (MC), to form implementation intentions on how to bargain (i.e. if‐then plans) (II), or both to contrast mentally and form implementation intentions (MCII).

Findings

–

The strategy of mental contrasting with implementation intentions led dyads to reach the largest joint agreements, compared to dyads that only used mental contrasting or if‐then plans. Moreover, participants who mentally contrasted formed more cooperative implementation intentions than participants who did not mentally contrast, mediating the effect of condition on joint gain.

Research limitations/implications

–

The findings suggest that the self‐regulatory strategy of mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII) leads to higher joint gain, and that this effect is mediated by mental contrasting's promotion of cooperative planning. More research should be done to understand the specific negotiation behaviors engendered by MCII, as well as its applicability to other negotiation scenarios.

Originality/value

–

These findings have implications for both self‐regulation and negotiation research. The result that MCII fosters integrative solutions reflects its potential to help people form cooperative plans and reach high joint‐value agreements in integrative scenarios. For negotiation research, the paper identifies an effective self‐regulatory strategy for producing high‐quality agreements.

Keywords

Citation

Kirk, D., Oettingen, G. and Gollwitzer, P.M. (2013), "Promoting integrative bargaining: mental contrasting with implementation intentions", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 148-165. https://doi.org/10.1108/10444061311316771

Download as .RIS

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2013, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

To read the full version of this content please select one of the options below

You may be able to access this content by logging in via Shibboleth, Open Athens or with your Emerald account.
To rent this content from Deepdyve, please click the button.
Rent from Deepdyve
If you think you should have access to this content, click the button to contact our support team.
Contact us
Manage cookies

We’re listening — tell us what you think

Join us on our journey