IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/5kw3f_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Driving a Hard Bargain is a Balancing Act: How social preferences constrain the negotiation process

Author

Listed:
  • Engler, Yola
  • Page, Lionel

Abstract

We investigate the haggling process in bargaining. Using an experimental bargaining game, we find that a first offer has a significant impact on the bargaining outcome even if it is costless to reject. First offers convey information on the player’s reservation value induced by his social preferences. They are most often accepted when they are not above the equal split. However, offers which request much more than the equal split induce punishing counteroffers. The bargaining outcome is therefore critically influenced by the balance of toughness and kindness signaled through the offers made in the haggling phase.

Suggested Citation

  • Engler, Yola & Page, Lionel, 2021. "Driving a Hard Bargain is a Balancing Act: How social preferences constrain the negotiation process," SocArXiv 5kw3f_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:5kw3f_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/5kw3f_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/60be9d09cb2a5e052d68c53a/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/5kw3f_v1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary Charness & David Masclet & Marie Claire Villeval, 2014. "The Dark Side of Competition for Status," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(1), pages 38-55, January.
    2. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 817-869.
    3. Nathaniel T. Wilcox & Nick Feltovich, 2000. "Thinking Like a Game Theorist: Comment," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-30, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    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. Yola Engler & Lionel Page, 2022. "Driving a hard bargain is a balancing act: how social preferences constrain the negotiation process," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 7-36, July.
    2. Gangadharan, Lata & Nikiforakis, Nikos & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2017. "Normative conflict and the limits of self-governance in heterogeneous populations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 143-156.
    3. Charness, Gary & Cobo-Reyes, Ramón & Sánchez, Ángela, 2016. "The effect of charitable giving on workers’ performance: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 61-74.
    4. Dimant, Eugen, 2015. "On Peer Effects: Behavioral Contagion of (Un)Ethical Behavior and the Role of Social Identity," MPRA Paper 68732, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Yola Engler & Lionel Page, 2022. "Driving a hard bargain is a balancing act: how social preferences constrain the negotiation process," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 7-36, July.
    6. Pikulina, Elena S. & Tergiman, Chloe, 2020. "Preferences for power," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    7. C. Bram Cadsby & Jim Engle-Warnick & Tony Fang & Fei Song, 2014. "Psychological Incentives, Financial Incentives, and Risk Attitudes in Tournaments: An Artefactual Field Experiment," Working Papers 1403, University of Guelph, Department of Economics and Finance.
    8. David Clingingsmith & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2018. "Status and the demand for visible goods: experimental evidence on conspicuous consumption," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(4), pages 877-904, December.
    9. Kräkel, Matthias, 2016. "Peer effects and incentives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 120-127.
    10. Rustichini, Aldo & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2014. "Moral hypocrisy, power and social preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 10-24.
    11. Tor Eriksson & Lei Mao & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "Saving face and group identity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(3), pages 622-647, September.
    12. Matthias Sutter & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler & Matthias Stefan & Markus Walzl, 2020. "Where to look for the morals in markets?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 30-52, March.
    13. House, Julian & Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario & Mazar, Nina, 2024. "Nudging the nudger: Performance feedback and organ donor registrations," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    14. Dato, Simon & Feess, Eberhard & Nieken, Petra, 2019. "Lying and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 193-218.
    15. Fehr, Dietmar, 2018. "Is increasing inequality harmful? Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 123-134.
    16. Stefan Grimm & Martin G. Kocher & Michal Krawczyk & Fabrice Lec, 2021. "Sharing or gambling? On risk attitudes in social contexts," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1075-1104, December.
    17. Preksha Jain & Rupayan Pal, 2023. "Corruption-proof minimum regulation for `Zero emission': Status incentives - Bane or boon?," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2023-009, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    18. Anna Conte & M. Levati, 2014. "Use of data on planned contributions and stated beliefs in the measurement of social preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 201-223, February.
    19. David Masclet & David L. Dickinson, 2019. "Incorporating Conditional Morality into Economic Decisions," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 2019-10, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    20. Fabio Galeotti & Daniel Zizzo, 2014. "What happens if you single out? An experiment," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(3), pages 703-729, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:socarx:5kw3f_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.