Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2017
-
(2017): Justice and Fairness in Negotiation. In: Group Decision and Negotiation 26 (1), S. 9-17. DOI: 10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4 Abstract: In this special issue we display a variety of approaches to the study of justice. Articles from scholars working on questions involving justice and fairness in decision making exchanges calls attention to a variety of research approaches, issue domains, cases and hypotheses used to explore these questions. All of the contributions emphasize analysis, using quantitative and qualitative methods including simulation-experiments, comparative case studies, statistical analyses and game theory. The articles in this collection reveal that justice and fairness concerns extend from the negotiation process to the outcome and into the implementation stage. They share the underlying expectation that individuals and groups gravitate toward fairness and justice in their exchanges with others. Therefore, a full understanding of group decision processes will be incomplete if justice and fairness issues are not considered alongside issues such as power distributions and alternatives to an agreeme nt. The authors also suggest that outcomes built on justice and fairness principles will enhance the efficiency, stability and implementation of the negotiated agreements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2017): A social-cognitive approach to understanding gender differences in negotiator ethics. The role of moral identity. In: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 138, S. 28-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.11.003
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.11.003 Abstract: To date, gender differences in ethics have received little theoretical attention. We utilize a social-cognitive framework to explain why these differences emerge and when women engage in less unethical negotiating behavior than do men. We propose that, relative to men’s, women’s stronger moral identities suppress unethical negotiating behavior. Study 1 establishes a gender difference in moral identity strength through a meta-analysis of over 19,000 people. Study 2 observes gender differences in two aspects of negotiator ethics—moral disengagement and opportunism. Study 3 establishes moral identity strength as an antecedent to negotiator ethics. Finally, Studies 4 and 5 explore financial incentives as a situational moderator. Because financial incentives temporarily decrease the salience of moral identity, they could mitigate gender differences in negotiator ethics, leading women to act more like men. Across both studies, financial incentives impacted women’s (but not men⍊ s) unethical negotiating behavior. Our findings help to explain why and when gender differences in ethics emerge. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von: 7
-
(2017): Culture-specific models of negotiation for virtual characters. Multi-attribute decision-making based on culture-specific values. In: AI & Society 32 (1), S. 51-63. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-014-0570-7
Abstract: We posit that observed differences in negotiation performance across cultures can be explained by participants trying to optimize across multiple values, where the relative importance of values differs across cultures. We look at two ways for specifying weights on values for different cultures: one in which the weights of the model are hand-crafted, based on intuition interpreting Hofstede dimensions for the cultures, and one in which the weights of the model are learned from data using inverse reinforcement learning (IRL). We apply this model to the Ultimatum Game and integrate it into a virtual human dialog system. We show that weights learned from IRL surpass both a weak baseline with random weights and a strong baseline considering only one factor for maximizing gain in own wealth in accounting for the behavior of human players from four different cultures. We also show that the weights learned with our model for one culture outperform weights learned for other cultures when playing against opponents of the first culture.
Keywords: Cultural decision-making, culture specific, Disziplin, entscheiden, Inverse reinforcement learning: Hofstede, Kulturtheorie, Mensch-Technik-Relationen (MTR), NEGOTIATION, Realtechnik, Science and Technology Studies (STS), social importance dynamics, Sozial Intelligente Agenten, Soziale Robotik, Spieltheorie, Technik, Ultimatum Game, virtual agents 2015
-
(2015): The Power to Oblige. Power, Gender, Negotiation Behaviors, and Their Consequences. In: Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 8 (1), S. 1-24. DOI: 10.1111/ncmr.12045
Abstract: This study experimentally examined how power and gender affect negotiation behaviors and how those behaviors affect negotiated outcomes. One hundred and forty‐six dyads, in four combinations of power and gender, negotiated compensation agreements. In line with gender stereotypes, male negotiators were more dominating and females more obliging and somewhat more compromising. However, partially challenging the common association of power and masculinity, high‐power negotiators were less dominating and more collaborating, obliging and avoiding than their low‐power opponents. Generally, feminine and high‐power behaviors induced agreement while masculine and low‐power behaviors enhanced distributive personal gain. The study also assessed patterns of behavioral reciprocity and used sophisticated analytic tools to control for dyadic interdependence. Therefore it helps to elucidate the negotiation process and the role that power and its interplay with gender play in it. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von 21
2014
-
(2014): Tracking managerial conflict adaptivity. Introducing a dynamic measure of adaptive conflict management in organizations. In: Journal of Organizational Behavior 35 (7), S. 945-968. DOI: 10.1002/job.1935
Abstract: Since Darwin, adaptation to change has been associated with survival and fit. Yet, despite this, leaders and managers often get stuck in dominating approaches to conflict, and few scholars have examined the role of adaptation in managing conflicts effectively over time and across changing situations. The goal of this paper is threefold. First, we develop a new measure for assessing conflict adaptivity of managers [the Managerial Conflict Adaptivity Assessment (MCAA)], based on a situated model of conflict in social relations. We define conflict adaptivity as the capacity to respond to different conflict situations in accordance with the demands specified by the situation. The measure consists of 15 distinct work-conflict scenarios and provides five behavioral response options, which represent five primary strategies employed in conflict. Individuals who tend to respond to the conflicts in a manner consistent with the situations provided are considered to be more adaptive. Second, we test and find that managerial conflict adaptivity is related to higher levels of satisfaction with conflict processes at work as well as higher levels of well-being at work. Third, we test the MCAA's construct validity and provide evidence that the MCAA is positively related to behavioral flexibility and self-efficacy.
Keywords: adaptation, adaptivity, Anpassung, BEHAVIOR, complexity, CONSEQUENCES, CONSTRUCT-VALIDITY, economics, Leadership, MCAA (Management Conflict Adaptivity Assessment) AP Skala (Adaptive Performance) - Anpassungsfähigkeit als Kriterium sozial angemessenen Handelns, model, NEGOTIATION, POWER, SELF-EFFICACY 2012
-
(2012): Getting Down to Basics. A Situated Model of Conflict in Social Relations. In: Negotiation Journal 28 (1), S. 7-43. DOI: 10.1111/j.1571-9979.2011.00324.x
Abstract: The field of conflict resolution is fractured. Despite many decades of fine research, we still lack a basic unifying framework that integrates the many theories of conflict dynamics. Thus, the findings from research on conflict are often piecemeal, decontextualized, contradictory, or focused on negative outcomes, which contributes to a persistent research-practice gap. In this article, we describe a situated model for the study of conflict that combines separate strands of scholarship into a coherent framework for conceptualizing conflict in dyadic social relations. The model considers conflict interactions in the context of social relations and employs prior research on the fundamental dimensions of social relations to create a basic framework for investigating conflict dynamics. The resulting model is heuristic and generative. We discuss the theoretical context and main propositions of this model as well as its implications for conflict resolution practitioners.
Keywords: adaptivity, BEHAVIOR, conflict, conflict theory, COOPERATION, decision-making, Dyadic Social Relations, dynamic systems theory, DYNAMICAL-SYSTEMS, HANDLING INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT, Interaktion, interdependence, INTRACTABLE CONFLICT, Konfliktverhalten, NEGOTIATION, ORGANIZATIONAL POWER, POWER, social relations, stimulus fields, UNEQUAL POWER 2008
-
Biel, Anders; Eek, Daniel; Gärling, Tommy; Gustafsson, Mathias (Hg.) (2008): New issues and paradigms in research on social dilemmas.. Toward an analysis of cooperation and fairness that includes concepts of cooperative game theory. Unter Mitarbeit von Axel Ostmann und Holger Meinhardt. New York: Springer
Abstract: Presents a game-theoretical analysis of cooperative and fair behavior. First, important concepts such as cooperation, fairness, bargaining, social dilemma, and communication are elaborated. The next sections introduce formal notation used to designate elements of noncooperative and cooperative games, and further define concepts such as core allocation and convexity. Several example games are outlined, including the CP3 game, and the HSW1 and HSW2 games. Solution concepts and properties of each example game are considered. Experimental results attained by S. Hackett et al. are reanalyzed, focusing on player efficiency and compliance, and providing geometric localization of game results. The results of the analysis suggest that common dilemma games are clear and convex, allowing for stable and efficient solutions. Players tended to compromise between the Nash equilibrium, the egalitarian standard, and the fairness standard. The interpretation of the findings considers the role of communication, the activation of behavior standards, and the equity of final results.
2004
-
(2004): Fuzzy Reasoning in a Multiagent System of Surveillance Sensors to Manage Cooperatively the Sensor-to-Task Assignment Problem. In: Applied Artificial Intelligence 18 (8), S. 673-711. DOI: 10.1080/08839510490496789
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08839510490496789 Abstract: In this work, a surveillance network composed of a set of sensors and a fusion center is designed as a multiagent system. Negotiation among sensors (agents) is proposed to solve the task-to-sensor assignment problem (the allocation of tasks to sensors), addressing several aspects. First, the fusion center determines the tasks (system tasks) to be performed by the network at each management cycle. To do that, a fuzzy reasoning system determines the priorities of these system tasks by means of a symbolic inference process using the fused data received from all sensors. In addition, a fuzzy reasoning process, similar to that performed in the fusion center, is proposed to evaluate the priority of local tasks (sensor tasks) now executed by each sensor. The network coordination procedure will be based on the system-task priorities, computed in the fusion center, and on the local priorities evaluated in each sensor. Priority values for system and sensor tasks will be the basis to guide a negotiation process among sensors in the multiagent system. The validity of the fuzzy reasoning approach is supported by the fact that it has been able to manage environmental situations in a similar way as experienced human operators do. Included results illustrate how the negotiation scheme, based on task priority and measured through their time-variant priority, allows the adaption of sensor operation to changing situations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
1996
-
(1996): Fair division. From cake-cutting to dispute resolution. First published.. Cambridge; New York, NY; Oakleigh, Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press. Online verfügbar unter http://www.loc.gov/catdir/description/cam027/95016488.html
Abstract: Cutting a cake, dividing up the property in an estate, determining the borders in an international dispute - such problems of fair division are ubiquitous. Fair Division treats all these problems and many more through a rigorous analysis of a variety of procedures for allocating goods (or 'bads' like chores), or deciding who wins on what issues, when there are disputes. Starting with an analysis of the well-known cake-cutting procedure, 'I cut, you choose', the authors show how it has been adapted in a number of fields and then analyze fair-division procedures applicable to situations in which there are more than two parties, or there is more than one good to be divided. In particular they focus on procedures which provide 'envy-free' allocations, in which everybody thinks he or she has received the largest portion and hence does not envy anybody else. They also discuss the fairness of different auction and election procedures.
- <<
- <
- 1