5-1

McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

CHAPTER FIVE
Perception, Cognition,
and Emotion
5-2
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Perception, Cognition, and
Emotion in Negotiation
The basic building blocks of all social
encounters are:
Perception
Cognition
Framing
Cognitive biases
Emotion

5-3
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Perception
Perception is:
The process by which individuals connect to
their environment.

A complex physical and psychological process

A sense-making process

5-4
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
The Role of Perception
The process of ascribing meaning to messages and events is strongly influenced
by the perceivers current state of mind, role, and comprehension of earlier
communications
People interpret their environment in order to respond appropriately
The complexity of environments makes it impossible to process all of the
information
People develop shortcuts to process information and these shortcuts create
perceptual errors
5-5
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Perceptual Distortion
Four major perceptual errors:
Stereotyping
Halo effects
Selective perception
Projection
5-6
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Stereotyping and Halo Effects
Stereotyping:
Is a very common distortion
Occurs when an individual assigns attributes to another
solely on the basis of the others membership in a particular
social or demographic category
Halo effects:
Are similar to stereotypes
Occur when an individual generalizes about a variety of
attributes based on the knowledge of one attribute of an
individual

5-7
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Selective Perception
and Projection
Selective perception:
Perpetuates stereotypes or halo effects
The perceiver singles out information that supports a prior
belief but filters out contrary information
Projection:
Arises out of a need to protect ones own self-concept
People assign to others the characteristics or feelings that
they possess themselves

5-8
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Framing
Frames:
Represent the subjective mechanism through which people
evaluate and make sense out of situations
Lead people to pursue or avoid subsequent actions
Focus, shape and organize the world around us
Make sense of complex realities
Define a person, event or process
Impart meaning and significance


5-9
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Types of Frames
Substantive
Outcome
Aspiration
Process
Identity
Characterization
Loss-Gain
5-10
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
How Frames Work in Negotiation
Negotiators can use more than one frame
Mismatches in frames between parties are sources of
conflict
Particular types of frames may lead to particular types
of arguments
Specific frames may be likely to be used with certain
types of issues
Parties are likely to assume a particular frame
because of various factors

5-11
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Interests, Rights, and Power
Parties in conflict use one of three frames:
Interests: people talk about their positions but often
what is at stake is their underlying interests
Rights: people may be concerned about who is
right that is, who has legitimacy, who is correct,
and what is fair
Power: people may wish to resolve a conflict on the
basis of who is stronger
5-12
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
The Frame of an Issue Changes as
the Negotiation Evolves
Negotiators tend to argue for stock issues or concerns
that are raised every time the parties negotiate
Each party attempts to make the best possible case for
his or her preferred position or perspective
Frames may define major shifts and transitions in a
complex overall negotiation
Multiple agenda items operate to shape issue
development
5-13
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Some Advice about Problem
Framing for Negotiators
Frames shape what the parties define as the key issues
and how they talk about them
Both parties have frames
Frames are controllable, at least to some degree
Conversations change and transform frames in ways
negotiators may not be able to predict but may be
able to control
Certain frames are more likely than others to lead to
certain types of processes and outcomes
5-14
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Cognitive Biases in Negotiation
Negotiators have a tendency to make
systematic errors when they process
information. These errors, collectively labeled
cognitive biases, tend to impede negotiator
performance.
5-15
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Cognitive Biases
Irrational escalation of
commitment
Mythical fixed-pie
beliefs
Anchoring and
adjustment
Issue framing and risk
Availability of
information


The winners curse
Overconfidence
The law of small
numbers
Self-serving biases
Endowment effect
Ignoring others
cognitions
Reactive devaluation

5-16
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Irrational Escalation of Commitment
and Mythical Fixed-Pie Beliefs
Irrational escalation of commitment
Negotiators maintain commitment to a course of action
even when that commitment constitutes irrational behavior
Mythical fixed-pie beliefs
Negotiators assume that all negotiations (not just some)
involve a fixed pie
5-17
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Anchoring and Adjustment
and Issue Framing and Risk
Anchoring and adjustment
The effect of the standard (anchor) against which
subsequent adjustments (gains or losses) are measured
The anchor might be based on faulty or incomplete
information, thus be misleading
Issue framing and risk
Frames can lead people to seek, avoid, or be neutral about
risk in decision making and negotiation
5-18
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Availability of Information
and the Winners Curse
Availability of information
Operates when information that is presented in vivid or
attention-getting ways becomes easy to recall.
Becomes central and critical in evaluating events and
options
The winners curse
The tendency to settle quickly on an item and then
subsequently feel discomfort about a win that comes too
easily
5-19
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Overconfidence and
The Law of Small Numbers
Overconfidence
The tendency of negotiators to believe that their ability to
be correct or accurate is greater than is actually true
The law of small numbers
The tendency of people to draw conclusions from small
sample sizes
The smaller sample, the greater the possibility that past
lessons will be erroneously used to infer what will happen
in the future
5-20
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Confidence or Overconfidence?
We came to Iceland to advance the cause of peace. . .and
though we put on the table the most far-reaching arms
control proposal in history, the General Secretary
rejected it.
President Ronald Reagan to reporters,
following completion of presummit arms control discussions
in Reykjavik, Iceland, on October 12, 1986.

I proposed an urgent meeting here because we had
something to propose. . .The Americans came to this
meeting empty handed.
Secretary General Mikhail Gorbachev,
Describing the same meeting to reporters.
5-21
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Self-Serving Biases
and Endowment Effect
Self-serving biases
People often explain another persons behavior by making
attributions, either to the person or to the situation
The tendency, known as fundamental attribution error, is
to:
Overestimate the role of personal or internal factors
Underestimate the role of situational or external factors
Endowment effect
The tendency to overvalue something you own or believe
you possess

5-22
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Ignoring Others Cognitions
and Reactive Devaluation
Ignoring others cognitions
Negotiators dont bother to ask about the other partys
perceptions and thoughts
This leaves them to work with incomplete information, and
thus produces faulty results
Reactive devaluation
The process of devaluing the other partys concessions
simply because the other party made them
5-23
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Managing Misperceptions and
Cognitive Biases in Negotiation
The best advice that negotiators can follow is:
Be aware of the negative aspects of these biases
Discuss them in a structured manner within the team
and with counterparts
5-24
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Mood, Emotion, and Negotiation
The distinction between mood and emotion is
based on three characteristics:
Specificity
Intensity
Duration
5-25
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Mood, Emotion, and Negotiation
Negotiations create both positive and negative
emotions
Positive emotions generally have positive
consequences for negotiations
They are more likely to lead the parties toward more
integrative processes
They also create a positive attitude toward the other side
They promote persistence
5-26
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Mood, Emotion, and Negotiation
Aspects of the negotiation process can lead to
positive emotions
Positive feelings result from fair procedures during
negotiation
Positive feelings result from favorable social comparison
5-27
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Mood, Emotion, and Negotiation
Negative emotions generally have negative
consequences for negotiations
They may lead parties to define the situation as competitive
or distributive
They may undermine a negotiators ability to analyze the
situation accurately, which adversely affects individual
outcomes
They may lead parties to escalate the conflict
They may lead parties to retaliate and may thwart
integrative outcomes
5-28
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Mood, Emotion, and Negotiation
Aspects of the negotiation process can lead to
negative emotions
Negative emotions may result from a competitive mindset
Negative emotions may result from an impasse
Effects of positive and negative emotion
Positive emotions may generate negative outcomes
Negative feelings may elicit beneficial outcomes
Emotions can be used strategically as negotiation
gambits