Perception, Cognition, and Emotion

PERCEPTION
-Perception is the process by which individuals connect to their environment. 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.

The Perceptual Process
Stimulus-->Attention-->Recognition-->Translation-->Behavior
Perception (words in bold)

-Perceptual Distortion is the perceiver’s own needs, desires, motivations, and personal experiences may create a predisposition about the other party. This is cause for concern when it leads to biases and errors in perception and subsequent communication.

4 major perceptual errors:
1. Stereotyping
2. Halo effects
3. Selective perception
4. Projection

Stereotyping and halo effects are examples of perceptual distortion by generalization: small amounts of perceptual information are used to draw large conclusions about individuals.

Selective perception and projection are, in contrast, forms of distortion that involve anticipating certain attributes and qualities in another person. The perceiver filters and distorts information to arrive at a consistent view.

1. Stereotyping: it occurs when one individual assigns attributes to another solely on the basis of the other’s membership in a particular social or demographic category. For example, males or females, religions, or sexual orientations.
2. Halo effects: it occur when people generalize about a variety of attributes based on the knowledge of one attribute of an individual.
3. Selective perception: it occurs when the perceiver singles out certain information that supports or reinforces a prior belief and filters out information that does not confirm that belief.
4. Projection: it occurs when people assign to others the characteristics or feelings that they possess themselves.

FRAMING
-A frame is the subjective mechanism through which people evaluate and make sense out of situations, leading them to pursue or avoid subsequent actions.
-Frames are important in negotiation because “people can encounter the same dispute and perceive it in very different ways as a result of their backgrounds, professional training or past experiences.”

Types of Frames
1. Substantive-what the conflict is about. Parties taking a substantive frame have a particular disposition about the key issue or concern in the conflict.
2. Outcome-a party’s predisposition to achieving a specific result or outcome from the negotiation. To the degree that a negotiator has a specific, preferred outcome he or she wants to achieve, the dominant frame may be to focus all strategy, tactics, and communication toward getting that outcome. Parties who have a strong outcome frame are more likely to engage primarily in distributive negotiations than in other types of negotiations.
3. Aspiration-a predisposition toward satisfying a broader set of interests or needs in negotiation. Rather than focusing on a specific outcome, the negotiator tries to unsure that his or her basic interests, needs, and concerns are met. Parties who have a strong aspiration frame are more likely to be primarily engaged in integrative negotiation than in other types.
4. Process-how the parties will go about resolving their dispute. Negotiators who have a strong process frame are less likely than others to be concerned about the specific negotiation issues but more concerned about how the deliberations will proceed, or how the dispute should be managed. When the major concerns are largely procedural rather than substantive, process frames will be strong.
5. Identity-how the parties define “who they are.” Parties are members of a number of different social groups-gender, religion, ethnic origin, place of birth, current place of residence, and the like. These are only a few of the categories people can use to define themselves and distinguish themselves from others.
6. Characterization-how the parties define the other parties. A characterization frame can clearly be shaped by experience with the other party, by information about the other party’s history or reputation, or by the way the other party comes across early in the negotiation experience. In conflict, identity frames tend to be positive; characterization frames tend to be negative.
7. Loss-gain—how the parties define the risk or reward associated with particular outcomes. For example, a buyer in a sales negotiation can view the transaction in loss terms (the monetary cost of the purchase) or in gain terms (the value of the item).

How Frames Work in Negotiation
1. Negotiators can use more than one frame.
2. Mismatches in frames between parties are sources of conflict.
3. Particular types of frames may lead to particular types of agreements.
4. Specific frames may be likely to be used with certain types of issues.
5. Parties are likely to assume a particular frame because of various factors.

Another Approach to Frames: Interests, Rights, and Power
-Interests. People are often concerned about what they need, desire, or want.
-Rights. People may also be concerned about who is “right”—that is, who has legitimacy, who is correct, or what is fair.
-Power. People may wish to resolve a negotiation on the basis of power. Negotiations resolved by power are sometimes based on who is physically stronger or is able to coerce the other, but more often, it is about imposing other types of costs—economic pressures, expertise, legitimate authority, and so on.

The Frame of an Issue Changes as the Negotiation Evolves
1. Negotiators tend to argue for stock issues, or concerns that are raised every time the parties negotiate.
2. Each party attempts to make the best possible case for his or her preferred position or perspective.
3. Frames may define major shifts and transitions in a complex overall negotiation.
4. Finally, multiple agenda items operate to shape issue development.

COGNITIVE BIASES in NEGOTIATION

-Errors when negotiators process information:
1. Irrational Escalation of Commitment
2. Mythical Fixed-Pie Beliefs
3. Anchoring and Adjustment
4. Issue Framing and Risk
5. Availability of Information
6. The Winner’s Curse
7. Overconfidence
8. The Law of Small Numbers
9. Self-Serving Biases
10. Endowment Effect
11. Ignoring Others’ Cognitions
12. Reactive Devaluation

MOOD, EMOTION, AND NEGOTIAION

-Negotiations Create Both Positive and Negative Emotions

-Positive Emotions Generally have Positive Consequences for Negotiations Positive emotions can lead to these consequences:
Positive feelings are more likely to lead the parties toward more integrative processes.
Positive feelings also create a positive attitude toward the other side.
Positive feelings promote persistence.

-Aspects of the Negotiation Process can Lead to Positive Emotions
Positive feelings result from fair procedures during negotiation.
Positive feelings result from favorable social comparisons.

-Negative Emotions Generally Have Negative Consequences for Negotiations
Negative emotions may lead parties to define the situation as competitive or distributive.
Negative emotions may undermine a negotiator’s ability to analyze the situation accurately, which adversely affects individual outcomes.
Negative emotions may lead parties to escalate the conflict.
Negative emotions 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 mindset.
Negative emotions may result from impasse.

-The Effects of Positive and Negative Emotion in Negotiation

Positive feelings may have negative consequences.
Negative feelings may create positive outcomes.

-Emotions Can be Used Strategically as Negotiation Gambits

By Charles, Ivan, Linda and Vivian