IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v14y2005i6d10.1007_s10726-005-9004-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Emotions in Envisioning Outcomes in Conflict Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Amer Obeidi

    (University of Waterloo)

  • Keith W. Hipel

    (University of Waterloo)

  • D. Marc Kilgour

    (Wilfrid Laurier University)

Abstract

A conceptual framework is proposed that accounts for the role of emotions in shaping conflict behavior. The isomorphism between the characteristics that define and drive conflict and those that engender emotions makes it feasible to reconcile emotions with current conflict analysis techniques. Building on Damasio's somatic markers hypothesis, the concept of possibility facilitates modeling the effects of emotion on the scenarios apprehended by the decision makers. Attention is focused on two subsets of the conventional set of feasible states, the hiddenstates that are invisible because of existing emotions (usually negative), and the possiblestates that are invisible because of missing emotions (usually positive). These new concepts can be incorporated within the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution. A model of the confrontation between the United States and North Korea over nuclear weapons demonstrates that the new concepts can simplify analysis and make new predictions that are consistent with the actual unfolding of events. Our main goals are to draw attention to the centrality of emotion in conflict and to the need for research on the incorporation of emotions into conflict analysis and resolution methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Amer Obeidi & Keith W. Hipel & D. Marc Kilgour, 2005. "The Role of Emotions in Envisioning Outcomes in Conflict Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(6), pages 481-500, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:14:y:2005:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-005-9004-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-005-9004-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-005-9004-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-005-9004-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bennett, Peter & Howard, Nigel, 1996. "Rationality, emotion and preference change Drama-theoretic models of choice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 603-614, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. M. Nassereddine & M. A. Ellakkis & A. Azar & M. D. Nayeri, 2021. "Developing a Multi-methodology for Conflict Resolution: Case of Yemen’s Humanitarian Crisis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 301-320, April.
    2. Eva-Maria Pesendorfer & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2007. "Social Embeddedness in Electronic Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 399-415, July.
    3. Kedong Yin & Li Yu & Xuemei Li, 2017. "An Improved Graph Model for Conflict Resolution Based on Option Prioritization and Its Application," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-14, October.
    4. Moreno-Jiménez, Jose María & Vargas, Luis G., 2018. "Cognitive Multiple Criteria Decision Making and the Legacy of the Analytic Hierarchy Process/Decisión Multicriterio Cognitiva y el Legado del Proceso Analítico Jerárquico," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 36, pages 67-80, Enero.
    5. Katharina Burger & Leroy White & Mike Yearworth, 2018. "Why so Serious? Theorising Playful Model-Driven Group Decision Support with Situated Affectivity," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 789-810, October.
    6. Garcia, Amanda & Obeidi, Amer & Hipel, Keith W., 2016. "Two methodological perspectives on the Energy East Pipeline conflict," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 397-409.
    7. Sean B. Walker & Keith W. Hipel, 2017. "Strategy, Complexity and Cooperation: The Sino-American Climate Regime," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 997-1027, September.
    8. Thomas Homer-Dixon & Manjana Milkoreit & Steven J. Mock & Tobias Schröder & Paul Thagard, 2014. "The Conceptual Structure of Social Disputes," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, March.
    9. Lukasz W. Jochemczyk & Andrzej Nowak, 2010. "Constructing a Network of Shared Agreement: A Model of Communication Processes in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 591-620, November.
    10. Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang & D. Marc Kilgour, 2020. "The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution: Reflections on Three Decades of Development," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 11-60, February.
    11. Scott D. Findlay & Paul Thagard, 2014. "Emotional Change in International Negotiation: Analyzing the Camp David Accords Using Cognitive-Affective Maps," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 1281-1300, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Suman Sensarma & Norio Okada, 2010. "Redefining the Game in Local Water Management Conflict: A Case Study," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(15), pages 4307-4316, December.
    2. Moreno-Jimenez, J. M. & Aguaron-Joven, J. & Escobar-Urmeneta, M. T. & Turon-Lanuza, A., 1999. "Multicriteria procedural rationality on SISDEMA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 388-403, December.
    3. F B Losa & V Belton, 2006. "Combining MCDA and conflict analysis: an exploratory application of an integrated approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(5), pages 510-525, May.
    4. Sumitra Sri Bhashyam & Gilberto Montibeller, 2012. "Modeling State-Dependent Priorities of Malicious Agents," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 172-185, June.
    5. Inohara, Takehiro, 2007. "Relational dominant strategy equilibrium as a generalization of dominant strategy equilibrium in terms of a social psychological aspect of decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 856-866, October.
    6. Bryant, J., 1997. "The plot thickens: Understanding interaction through the metaphor of drama," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 255-266, June.
    7. Bennett, Peter, 1998. "Confrontation analysis as a diagnostic tool," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 465-482, September.
    8. Mirosław Bełej & Radosław Cellmer & Michał Głuszak, 2020. "The Impact of Airport Proximity on Single-Family House Prices—Evidence from Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-26, September.
    9. J Bryant, 2007. "Drama theory: dispelling the myths," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 602-613, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:14:y:2005:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-005-9004-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.