The value of apology in construction dispute negotiation

References

• Adams JS. 1965. Inequity in social exchange. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 2:267–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agapitos A, Cheung SO. 2017. Apologies, apology legislation and civil disputes: the practical implications of apology legislation for dispute resolution practitioners and their clients. Arbitration. 83 (2):133–140.
   Google Scholar
• Allred KG, Mallozzi JS, Matsui F, Raia CP. 1997. The influence of anger and compassion on negotiation performance. Organ Behav Human Decis Processes. 70 (3):175–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axelrod R. 1984. The evolution of cooperation. 1st ed. New York, N.Y., U.S.: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Baron RM, Kenny DA. 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Personality Soc Psychol: Interpersonal Relat Group Processes. 51 (6):1173–1182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barry B, Friedman RA. 1998. Bargainer characteristics in distributive and integrative negotiation. J Personality Soc Psychol. 74(2):345–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett M, Earwaker D. 1994. Victim’s response to apologies: the effects of offender responsibility and offense severity. J Soc Psychol. 134(4):457–464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronfenbrenner U. 2010. The mirror image in Soviet-American relations: a social psychologist’s report. J Soc Issues. 17(3):45–56.
   Google Scholar
• Brown JG. 2004. Apology: the role of apology in negotiation. Marquette Law Rev. 87 (4):665–673.
   Google Scholar
• Burton JW. 1998. Conflict resolution: the human dimension. Int J Peace Stud. 3 (1):1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Burton JW, Sandole JD. 1987. Expanding the debate on generic theory of conflict resolution: a response to a critique. Negot J. 3(1):97–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carnevale PJ, Isen A. 1986. The influence of positive affect and visual access on discovery of integrative solution. Organizational Behav Hum Decis Processes. 37 (1):1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung SO. 1999. Critical factors affecting the use of alternative dispute resolution processes in construction. Int J Proj Manage. 17(3):189–194.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung SO, Chow PT, Yiu TW. 2015. Performance of mediator tactics in building management disputes. J Constr Eng Manage. 31 (2):4014033.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung SO, Cheung HC. 2016. Apology ordinance: a push for mediation in Hong Kong. RICS COBRA Conference; 20–22 September 2016; Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung SO, Pang HY. 2013. Anatomy of construction disputes. J Constr Eng Manage. 139(1):15–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung SO, Yiu TW. 2006. Are construction disputes inevitable? IEEE Trans Eng Manage. 53 (3):456–470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow PT, Kong F, Cheung SO. 2012. Mediating and moderating effect of tension on withdrawal-commitment relationship in construction dispute negotiation. J Constr Eng Manage. 138(10):1230–1238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow PT, Cheung SO, Wa YK. 2015. Impact of trust and satisfaction on the commitment-withdrawal relationship. J Manage Eng. 31(5):4014087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curhan J, Neale M, Ross L. 2004. Dynamic valuation: preference changes in the context of face-to-face negotiation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 40(2):142–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darby BW, Schlenker BR. 1982. Children’s reactions to apologies. J Personality Soc Psychol. 43(4):742–753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deci EL, Ryan RM. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. 1st ed. New York, N.Y., U.S.: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deci EL, Vansteenkiste M. 2004. Self-determination theory and basic need satisfaction: understanding human development in positive psychology. Recherché di Psicologia. 27(1):17–34.
   Google Scholar
• De Dreu CKW, Van Kleef GA. 2004. The influence of power on the information search, impression formation, and demands in negotiation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 40(3):303–319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demirdöğen ÜD. 2011. A social-psychological approach to conflict resolution: interactive problem solving. Int J Soc Inquiry. 4 (1):215–228.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Justice 2015. Consultation paper enactment of apology legislation in Hong Kong, Hong Kong: Department of Justice, Steering Committee on Mediation.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Justice 2016. Consultation paper enactment of apology legislation in Hong Kong: report and 2nd round consultation. Hong Kong: Department of Justice, Steering Committee on Mediation.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsch M. 2003. Cooperation and conflict: a personal perspective on the history of the social psychological study of conflict resolution. In: M. A. West, D. J. Tjosvold, and K.G. Smith, editors, International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working, 1st ed. San Francisco: Wiley, p. 9–43.
   Google Scholar
• Dunning D, Griffin DW, Milojkovic JD, Ross L. 1990. The overconfidence effect in social prediction. J Personality Soc Psychol. 58 (4):568–581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Easterby-Smith M, Thorpe R, Lowe A. 1991. Management research: an introduction. London, U.K: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Enshassi A, Choudhry RM, El-Ghandour S. 2009. Contractors’ perception towards causes of claims in construction projects. Int J Constr Manage. 9(1):79–92.
   Google Scholar
• Festinger L. 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance. 1st ed. Stanford, C.A.: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher RA. 1924. On a distribution yielding the error functions of several well known statistics. Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematics, University of Toronto Press, vol. 2, p. 805–813.
   Google Scholar
• Folger R, Cropanzano R. 2001. Fairness theory: justice as accountability. In: J. Greenberg and R. Cropanzano, editors, Advances in organizational justice. 1st ed. Stanford: Stanford University Press; p. 1–55.
   Google Scholar
• Folger R, Skarlicki DP. 1999. Unfairness and resistance to change: hardship as mistreatment. J Organ Change Manage. 12(1):35–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser N. 2001. Recognition without Ethics? Theory, culture and society. 18(2–3):21–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frosch, J. 1966. A note on reality constancy. In: Psychoanalysis: a general psychology: essays in honor of Heinz Hartmann. New York: International Universities Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg J, Cropanzano R. 2002. Advances in organizational justice. 1st ed. Stanford, C.A.: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Griffin DW, Dunning D, Ross L. 1990. The role of construal processes in overconfident predictions about the self and others. J Personal Soc Psychol. 59(6):1128–1139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin DW, Ross L. 1991. Subjective construal, social inference, and human misunderstanding. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 24:319–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guan X, Park HS, Lee HE. 2009. Cross-cultural differences in apology. Int J Intercultural Relations. 33(1):32–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hackman JR, Oldham GR. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational Behav Hum Perform. 16(2):250–279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. 2008. Multivariate data analysis. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Han TA, Pereira LM, Santos FC, Lenaerts T. 2013. Good agreements make good friends. Sci Rep. 3 (2695):2695–2697.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Haugen T, Singh A. 2015. Dispute resolution strategy selection. J Leg Aff Dispute Resolut Eng Constr. 7(3):5014004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastorf AH, Cantril H. 1954. They saw a game; a case study. J Abnormal Soc Psychol. 49(1):129–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodgins HS, Liebeskind E. 2003. Apology versus defence: antecedents and consequences. J Exp Soc Psychol. 39(4):297–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofbauer J, Sigmund K. 1998. Evolutionary games and population dynamics. 1st ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holtgraves T. 1997. Styles of language use: individual and cultural variability in conversational indirectness. J Personality Soc Psychol: Personality Processes Individual Differences. 73 (3):624–637.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Honneth A. 2001. Recognition or redistribution? Changing perspectives on the moral order of society. Theory Culture Soc. 18 (2–3):43–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Illankoon IMCS, Tam VWY, Le KN, Ranadewa KATO. 2019. Causes of disputes, factors affecting dispute resolution and effective alternative dispute resolution for Sri Lankan construction industry. Int J Constr Manage. 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1616415
   Google Scholar
• Jaccard J, Turrrisi R, Choi KW. 1990. Interaction effects in multiple regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• James LR, Brett JM. 1984. Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation. J Appl Psychol. 69 (2):307–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judd CM, Kenny DA. 1981. Estimating the effects of social interventions. 1st ed. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A. 1979. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica. 47 (2):263–292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelman HC. 1953. Attitude change as a function of response restriction. Hum Relat. 6(3):185–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelman HC. 1979. The role of actin in attitude change. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, vol. 27, p. 117–194.
   Google Scholar
• Kelman HC. 1996. Negotiation as interactive problem solving. Int Negot. 1(1):99–123.
   Google Scholar
• Korobkin R. 2006. Psychological impediments to mediation success: theory and practice. Ohio State J Dispute Resolut. 21(2):281–290.
   Google Scholar
• Kruskal WH, Wallis WA. 1952. Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 47 (260):583–621.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levi DL. 1997. The role of apology in mediation. New York Univ Law Rev. 72 (5):1165–1209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Q, Yin Z, Chong H, Shi Q. 2018. Nexus of inter-organizational trust, principled negotiation, and joint action for improved cost performance: survey of Chinese megaprojects. J Manage Eng. 34(6):4018036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B, Phillips LD. 1982. Calibration of probabilities: the state of the art to 1980. In: Kahneman D., Slovic P., and Tversky A., editors. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases, 1st ed. New York, N.Y. USA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lord CG, Ross L, Lepper MR. 1979. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: the effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. J Personality Soc Psychol. 37 (11):2098–2109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo Y, Wang Z, Zhang H, Chen A. 2016. The influence of family socio-economic status on learning burnout in adolescents: mediating and moderating effects. J Child Fam Stud. 25(7):2111–2119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma N. 2008. Overconfidence—its theory and implications in dispute resolution. ADR Bull. 10 (4):1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Maslow AH. 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev. 50(4):370–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAlinden AM, Naylor B. 2016. Reframing public inquiries as ‘procedural justice’ for victims of institutional child abuse: towards a hybrid model of justice. Sydney Law Rev. 38(3):277–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mezquita L, Camacho L, Ibanez MI, Villa H, Moya - Higueras J, Ortet G. 2015. Five-factor model and alcohol outcomes: mediating and moderating role of alcohol expectancies. Personality Individual Differ. 74:29–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy M. 2011. Apology, recognition, and reconciliation. Hum Rights Rev. 12 (1):47–69.
   Google Scholar
• Nesse RM. 2001. Evolution and the capacity for commitment. Russell Sage Foundation series on trust, 1st ed. New York, N.Y.: Russell Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Nobles M. 2008. The politics of official apologies, 1st ed. New York, U.S: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Orenstein A. 1999. Apology excepted: incorporating a feminist analysis into evidence policy where you would least expect it. Sw U L Rev. 28:221–239.
   Google Scholar
• Osgood CE, Tannenbaum PH. 1955. The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychol Rev. 62(1):42–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park R, Searcy D. 2012. Job autonomy as a predictor of mental well-being: the moderating role of quality-competitive environment. J Bus Psychol. 27(3):305–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pruitt DG. 1981. Negotiation behaviour, 1st ed. New York, N.Y.: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips-Alonge O. 2019. The influence of partnering on the occurrence of construction requirement conflicts and disputes. Int J Constr Manage. 19(4):291–306.
   Google Scholar
• Ring PS, Van de Ven AH. 1994. Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Acad Manage Rev. 19(1):90–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbennolt JK. 2006. Apologies and settlement levers. J Empirical Legal Stud. 3(2):333–373.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson R, Keltner D, Ward A, Ross L. 1995. Actual versus assumed differences in construal: ‘Naive realism’ in intergroup perception and conflict. J Personality Soc Psychol. 68(3):404–417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross L. 1977. The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: distortions in the attribution process. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 10:173–220.
   Google Scholar
• Ross L. 1995. Reactive devaluation in negotiation and conflict resolution. In: K. Arrow, R. Mnookin, L. Ross, A. Tversky, and R.B. Wilson, editors. Barriers to conflict resolution, 1st ed. New York: Stanford University; p. 27–42.
   Google Scholar
• Ross L, Stillinger C. 1991. Barriers to conflict resolution. Negot J. 8(4):389–404.
   Google Scholar
• Ross L, Ward A. 1995. Psychological barriers to dispute resolution. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 21:255–304.
   Google Scholar
• Schweiger DM, DeNisi AS. 1991. Communication with employees following a merger: a longitudinal field experiment. Acad Manage J. 34 (1):110–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schweitzer ME, Brooks AW, Galinsky AD. 2015. The organizational apology. Harv Bus Rev. 44–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sigmund K. 2010. The calculus of selfishness, 1st ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tabak BA, McCullough ME, Luna LR, Bono G, Berry JW. 2012. Conciliatory gestures facilitate forgiveness and feelings of friendship by making transgressors appear more agreeable. J Personal. 80(2).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taft L. 2000. Apology subverted: the commodification of apology. The Yale Law Journal. 109 (5):1135–1160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thibaut JW, Walker L. 1975. Procedural justice: a psychological perspective. 1st ed. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Trivers RL. 1971. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q Rev Biol. 46 (1):35–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanhalst J, Luyckx K, Raes F, Goossens L. 2012. Loneliness and depressive symptoms: the mediating and moderating role of uncontrollable ruminative thoughts. J Psychol. 146 (1–2):259–276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walfisch T, Van Dijk D, Kark R. 2013. Do you really expect me to apologize? The impact of status and gender on the effectiveness of an apology in the workplace. J Appl Soc Psychol. 43 (7):1446–1458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Washakowski A. 2015. The moderating effects of praise on the relationship between autonomy and work motivation [Honours Theses]. Paper 215: 1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Witvliet CVO, Worthington EL, Wade NG. 2002. Victims’ heart rate and facial EMG responses to receiving an apology and restitution. Psychophysiol Suppl. 39:88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf R. 2011. Respect and disrespect in international politics: the significance of status recognition. Int Theory. 3(1):105–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong PSP, Cheung SO, Leung KY. 2008. Moderating effect of organizational learning type on performance improvement. J Manage Eng. 24 (3):162–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright M. 2004. The British journal of criminology. Br J Criminol. 44 (2):290–292.
   Google Scholar
• Yiu TW, Cheung SO. 2007. A study of construction mediator tactics—Part II: the contingent use of tactics. Build Environ. 42(2):762–769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang S, Fu Y, Gao Y, Zheng X. 2016. Influence of trust and contract on dispute negotiation behavioural strategy in construction subcontracting. J Manage Eng. 32(4):4016001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar