Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by King, D. C.
Right arrow Articles by Glidewell, J. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Dyadic Bargaining Outcomes Under Individualistic and Competitive Orientations

Dennis C. King

Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company; 115 Pomona Avenue, Apt. B, Long Beach, California 90803.

John C. Glidewell

University of Chicago

Using forty-eight manufacturing managers as subjects, this experiment tested the outcomes of bargaining sessions held under all the possible combinations of two subject orientations (individualistic and competitive) and four conditions of communication (oral and written in face-to-face and remote situations). The results failed to show any significant main effects of orientation or communication on outcomes or bargaining times, but did show a significant interaction between orientation and remote vs. face-to-face bargaining. Under remote conditions a competitive orientation yielded slightly greater joint outcomes, but, under face-to-face conditions, an individualistic orientation yielded markedly greater joint outcomes. There was a correlation between outcomes and some measures of communication, but the pattern of the experimental effects on communication was not congruent with the pattern of effects on outcome. The findings imply that some visual signals interfere with bargaining under competitive, face-to-face conditions, but the interfering signals were not isolated.

Human Relations, Vol. 33, No. 11, 781-803 (1980)
DOI: 10.1177/001872678003301102
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Political Research QuarterlyHome page
D. Diermeier, R. I. Swaab, V. H. Medvec, and M. C. Kern
The Micro-Dynamics of Coalition Formation
Political Research Quarterly, September 1, 2008; 61(3): 484 - 501.
[Abstract] [PDF]