IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v35y1991i4p571-593.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Value Differences and Conflict Resolution

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Druckman

    (National Research Council)

  • Benjamin J. Broome

    (George Mason University)

Abstract

Effects of familiarity and liking on negotiating perceptions and behaviors are explored in two experiments, one focusing on prenegotiation expectations and perceptions (experiment 1), the other on negotiation processes and outcomes (experiment 2). Both experiments were embedded in the context of a simulation of conflict between groups resembling the Greek and Turkish communities in Cyprus. Results obtained in the two experiments showed different effects for the familiarity and liking variables: Analytically distinct effects for these variables on prenegotiation perceptions contrasted with the combined effects on negotiating behavior and postnegotiation perceptions. In experiment 1, liking influenced expected movement from initial positions, perceptions of the opponent, and types of strategies prepared for the negotiation; familiarity had its primary impact on perceptions of the situation as being conducive to agreement. Results of experiment 2 showed that reducing either liking or familiarity served to reduce willingness to reach compromise agreements, whether actual or desired. These results suggest that the positive effects obtained for a facilitation condition reported in an earlier study by Druckman, Broome, and Korper (1988) may have been due to the combination of familiarity and liking produced by the experimental manipulation. Implications of the results obtained in both experiments are discussed in terms of changing expectations and uncertainty reduction. Further analyses of negotiating process dynamics would elucidate the difference between reaching agreements in the short run and developing relationships between groups over the long term.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Druckman & Benjamin J. Broome, 1991. "Value Differences and Conflict Resolution," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(4), pages 571-593, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:35:y:1991:i:4:p:571-593
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002791035004001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002791035004001
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002791035004001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Neil E. Fassina & Glen R. Whyte, 2014. "“I am Disgusted by Your Proposal”: The Effects of a Strategic Flinch in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 901-920, July.
    2. Michael Filzmoser & Patrick Hippmann & Rudolf Vetschera, 2016. "Analyzing the Multiple Dimensions of Negotiation Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 1169-1188, November.
    3. Jochen Reb, 2010. "The Influence of Past Negotiations on Negotiation Counterpart Preferences," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 457-477, September.
    4. Kihwan Kim & Nicole L. Cundiff & Suk Bong Choi, 2015. "Emotional Intelligence and Negotiation Outcomes: Mediating Effects of Rapport, Negotiation Strategy, and Judgment Accuracy," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 477-493, May.
    5. Lukasz W. Jochemczyk & Andrzej Nowak, 2010. "Constructing a Network of Shared Agreement: A Model of Communication Processes in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 591-620, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:35:y:1991:i:4:p:571-593. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.