IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/13502_14.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Culture, Cognition and Conflict: How Neuroscience Can Help to Explain Cultural Differences in Negotiation and Conflict Management

In: Neuroeconomics and the Firm

Author

Listed:
  • John F. McCarthy
  • Carl A. Scheraga
  • Donald E. Gibson

Abstract

The ideal firm has been studied over several centuries, yet little is known about what makes one successful and another fail. This pioneering book brings together leading researchers investigating the concept of the firm from a neuroscientific perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • John F. McCarthy & Carl A. Scheraga & Donald E. Gibson, 2010. "Culture, Cognition and Conflict: How Neuroscience Can Help to Explain Cultural Differences in Negotiation and Conflict Management," Chapters, in: Angela A. Stanton & Mellani Day & Isabell M. Welpe (ed.), Neuroeconomics and the Firm, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:13502_14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781848444409.00027.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gonzalez, Cleotilde & Dana, Jason & Koshino, Hideya & Just, Marcel, 2005. "The framing effect and risky decisions: Examining cognitive functions with fMRI," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Adler, Nancy J. & Graham, John L. & Gehrke, Theodore Schwarz, 1987. "Business negotiations in Canada, Mexico, and the United States," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 411-429, October.
    3. John L Graham, 1985. "The Influence of Culture on the Process of Business Negotiations: An Exploratory Study," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 16(1), pages 81-96, March.
    4. Wendi L. Adair & Jeanne M. Brett, 2005. "The Negotiation Dance: Time, Culture, and Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 33-51, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zhang, Zhi-Xue & Liu, Leigh Anne & Ma, Li, 2021. "Negotiation beliefs: Comparing Americans and the Chinese," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5).
    2. Ott, Ursula F. & Prowse, Peter & Fells, Ray & Rogers, Helen, 2016. "The DNA of negotiations as a set theoretic concept: A theoretical and empirical analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3561-3571.
    3. Roger Volkema, 2012. "Understanding initiation behavior in Brazilian negotiations: an analysis of four regional subcultures," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 9(2), pages 88-108, April.
    4. Junjun Cheng, 2020. "Bidirectional Relationship Progression in Buyer–Seller Negotiations: Evidence from South Korea," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 293-320, April.
    5. Ahammad, Mohammad Faisal & Tarba, Shlomo Y. & Liu, Yipeng & Glaister, Keith W. & Cooper, Cary L., 2016. "Exploring the factors influencing the negotiation process in cross-border M&A," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 445-457.
    6. Wardley, Marcus & Alberhasky, Max, 2021. "Framing zero: Why losing nothing is better than gaining nothing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    7. Michele Griessmair & Johannes Gettinger, 2020. "Take the Right Turn: The Role of Social Signals and Action–Reaction Sequences in Enacting Turning Points in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 425-459, June.
    8. Arts, Sara & Ong, Qiyan & Qiu, Jianying, 2020. "Measuring subjective decision confidence," MPRA Paper 117907, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Johannes Gettinger & Michael Filzmoser & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2016. "Why can’t we settle again? Analysis of factors that influence agreement prospects in the post-settlement phase," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(4), pages 413-440, May.
    10. Michele Griessmair & Daniel Druckman, 2018. "To Match or Not to Match? Reactions to Turning Points in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-83, February.
    11. Maria Ishaque, 2021. "Managing Conflict of Interests in Professional Accounting Firms: A Research Synthesis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 537-555, March.
    12. Brian Klaas & Anna-Katherine Ward, 2015. "Formal, Justice-Oriented Voice in the Nonunion Firm: Who Speaks Up and When?," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 321-356, April.
    13. William W. Baber, 2018. "Identifying Macro Phases Across the Negotiation Lifecycle," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 885-903, December.
    14. Daniel Wall & Raymond D. Crookes & Eric J. Johnson & Elke U. Weber, 2020. "Risky choice frames shift the structure and emotional valence of internal arguments: A query theory account of the unusual disease problem," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(5), pages 685-703, September.
    15. Yunxia Zhu, 2009. "Managing Business Relationships in New Zealand and China," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 225-248, April.
    16. Muhammed-Fatih Kaya & Mareike Schoop, 2022. "Analytical Comparison of Clustering Techniques for the Recognition of Communication Patterns," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 555-589, June.
    17. Murong Yang & Laurence S. J. Roope & James Buchanan & Arthur E. Attema & Philip M. Clarke & A. Sarah Walker & Sarah Wordsworth, 2022. "Eliciting risk preferences that predict risky health behavior: A comparison of two approaches," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(5), pages 836-858, May.
    18. Saorín-Iborra, M. Carmen, 2008. "Time pressure in acquisition negotiations: Its determinants and effects on parties' negotiation behaviour choice," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 285-309, June.
    19. Li, Tiger & Cavusgil, S. Tamer, 1995. "A classification and assessment of research streams in International Marketing," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 251-277, September.
    20. Manel Baucells & Antonio Villasís, 2010. "Stability of risk preferences and the reflection effect of prospect theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 193-211, February.

    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:elg:eechap:13502_14. 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: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.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.