21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Precious Property or Magnificent Money? How Money Salience but Not Temperature Priming Affects First-Offer Anchors in Economic Transactions

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The present study aims for a better understanding of how individuals’ behavior in monetary price negotiations differs from their behavior in bartering situations. Two contrasting hypotheses were derived from endowment theory and current negotiation research to examine whether negotiators are more susceptible to anchoring in price negotiations versus in bartering transactions. In addition, past research found that cues of coldness enhance cognitive control and reduce anchoring effects. We attempted to replicate these coldness findings for price anchors in a distributive negotiations scenario and to illuminate the potential interplay of coldness priming with a price versus bartering manipulation. Participants ( N = 219) were recruited for a 2 × 2 between-subjects negotiation experiment manipulating (1) monetary focus and (2) temperature priming. Our data show a higher anchoring susceptibility in price negotiations than in bartering transactions. Despite a successful priming manipulation check, coldness priming did not affect participants’ anchoring susceptibility (nor interact with the price/bartering manipulation). Our findings improve our theoretical understanding of how the focus on negotiation resources frames economic transactions as either unidirectional or bidirectional, and how this focus shapes parties’ susceptibility to the anchoring bias and negotiation behavior. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.

          Deciding advantageously in a complex situation is thought to require overt reasoning on declarative knowledge, namely, on facts pertaining to premises, options for action, and outcomes of actions that embody the pertinent previous experience. An alternative possibility was investigated: that overt reasoning is preceded by a nonconscious biasing step that uses neural systems other than those that support declarative knowledge. Normal participants and patients with prefrontal damage and decision-making defects performed a gambling task in which behavioral, psychophysiological, and self-account measures were obtained in parallel. Normals began to choose advantageously before they realized which strategy worked best, whereas prefrontal patients continued to choose disadvantageously even after they knew the correct strategy. Moreover, normals began to generate anticipatory skin conductance responses (SCRs) whenever they pondered a choice that turned out to be risky, before they knew explicitly that it was a risky choice, whereas patients never developed anticipatory SCRs, although some eventually realized which choices were risky. The results suggest that, in normal individuals, nonconscious biases guide behavior before conscious knowledge does. Without the help of such biases, overt knowledge may be insufficient to ensure advantageous behavior.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            One Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Investigating Variation in Replicability

              Although replication is a central tenet of science, direct replications are rare in psychology. This research tested variation in the replicability of 13 classic and contemporary effects across 36 independent samples totaling 6,344 participants. In the aggregate, 10 effects replicated consistently. One effect – imagined contact reducing prejudice – showed weak support for replicability. And two effects – flag priming influencing conservatism and currency priming influencing system justification – did not replicate. We compared whether the conditions such as lab versus online or US versus international sample predicted effect magnitudes. By and large they did not. The results of this small sample of effects suggest that replicability is more dependent on the effect itself than on the sample and setting used to investigate the effect.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                04 July 2018
                2018
                : 9
                : 1099
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science , London, United Kingdom
                [2] 2Institute of Management and Organization, Leuphana University of Lüneburg , Lüneburg, Germany
                Author notes

                Edited by: Martin S. Hagger, Curtin University, Australia

                Reviewed by: Zoe C. Walter, The University of Queensland, Australia; Derwin King Chung Chan, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

                *Correspondence: Yannik M. Leusch, y.m.leusch@ 123456lse.ac.uk

                This article was submitted to Personality and Social Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01099
                6039788
                671a1ead-ab3c-41a1-83f2-1cbe50491d8b
                Copyright © 2018 Leusch, Loschelder and Basso.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 23 January 2018
                : 08 June 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 55, Pages: 9, Words: 0
                Funding
                Funded by: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 10.13039/501100001659
                Award ID: LO 2201/2-1
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                anchoring,loss aversion,resource framing,money,embodiment,temperature priming,bartering

                Comments

                Comment on this article