Interaction Goals in Negotiation

References

• Abelson, R, P. (1981). Psychological status of the script concept. American Psychologist, 36, 715–729.
   Google Scholar
• Adams, J. S. (1976). The structure and dynamics of behavior in organizational boundary roles. In M. P. Dunnettc (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1175–1199). Chicago: Rand McNalty.
   Google Scholar
• Bacharach, S. B., & Lawler, E, J. (1981), Bargaining: Power.; tactics, and outcomes. Sail Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Bargh, J, A, (1984). Automatic and conscious processing of social information. In R. W. Wyer & T. K. Srutl (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (Vol. 3, pp. 1–44). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Bazerman, M. H. & Carroll, J. S. (1987). Negotiator cognition. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 247–288.
   Google Scholar
• Bednar, D. A., &. Currington, W. P. (1983). Interaction analysis: A tool for understanding negotiations. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 36,389–401.
   Google Scholar
• Benoit, P. J. (1983. November), A review and response lo criticism of argument. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Benoit, P. J., & Benoit, \v. L. (1986). Consciousness: The mindless/mindfulness and verbal report controversy. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 50, 41–63.
   Google Scholar
• Beiger, C. R. (1987). Planning and scheming: Strategics for initiating relationships. In R. Burnett, P. McGhee, it L). Clarke (Eds.), Accounting for relationships: Social representations of interpersonal links (pp. 158–174). London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Bonoma, T. (1976). Conflict, cooperation, and trust in three power systems. Behavioral Science, 6, 419–514.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, B. R. (1968). The effccts of need to maintain face in interpersonal bargaining. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 107–122.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, B. R. (1977). Face-saving and face-res to rati on in negotiation. In D. Drtictman (Ed.), Negotiations. Social psychological perspectives (pp. 275–299). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, Brown, P., & Levinson, S, (1978), Universals in language use: Politeness phenomena. In E. N. Goody (Ed.). Questions and politeness (pp. 56–289). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruce, B., & Newman, D. (197N). Interacting plans. Cognitive Science, 2, 195–233. Burke, J. A. (1986). Interacting plans in the accomplishment of a practical activity. In D. G. Ellis Sl W. A. Do nob lie (fids.), Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes (pp. 203–222), Hillsdale, NJ: I.awrence Hrlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Burleson, B, R. (1981), On the analysis and criticism of arguments: Some theoretical and methodological considerations. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 15, 137–147.
   Google Scholar
• Burleson, B. R. Wilson, S. R., Waltman, M. S. Goering, E. M., Ely, T. K., & Whaley, B. (1988). Item desirability effects in compliance-gaining research: Seven studies documenting artifacts in the strategy selection procedure. Human Communication Research, 14, 429–486.
   Google Scholar
• Carlisle, J., & f-eary, M, (1981). Negotiating groups. In R. Payne & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Groups at work (pp. 165–188), New York: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Camevale, P.J.D., Pniitt, D. G., & Britton, S. D. (1979). Looking tough: The negotiator under constituent surveillance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 118–121.
   Google Scholar
• Camevale, P.J.D., Pruitt, D. G., & Scilheimer, S, D. (1981), Looking and competing: Accountability and visual access in integrative bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 111–120.
   Google Scholar
• Carver, C S., & Scheier, M, F. (1982). Control theory: A useful conceptual framework for personality-Social, clinical, and health psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 111–135.
   Google Scholar
• Ccgala, D. J., Waldron, V. Ludlum, J. McCabe, B., Teboul, B., & Yost, S. (1988, March). A study of interactants’ thoughts and feelings during conversation. Paper presented at the Ninth Annual Temple University Conference on Discourse Analysis, Philadelphia.
   Google Scholar
• Cialdini, R. B. (1988), Influence: Science and pructice (2n<l ed.). Glen view, IL: Scott, Foresman.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, R, A., & Delia, J. G, (1979). Topoi and rhetorical competence. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 187–206.
   Google Scholar
• Craig. R. T. (1986), Goals in discourse. In D. G. Ellis & W. A, Donohue (Eds.), Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes (pp. 257–275). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Craig, R. T., Tracy, K., & Splsak, F. (1986). The discourse of requests: Assessment of a politeness approach. Human Communication Research, 12, 437–468.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, L. A. (1988, March). The unmasking of underlying goals. Paper presented at the Ninth Annual Temple University Conference on Discourse Analysis, Philadelphia.
   Google Scholar
• Derber, M. Chalmers, W. R., & F.delman, M. T. (1965). Plant union-management relations: From practice to theory, Urbana: University of Illinois, Labor and Industrial Relations Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsch, M. (1969). Conflicts: Productive or destructive? Journal of Social Issues, 25, 7–41.
   Google Scholar
• Donohue, W. A. (1978). An empirical framework for examining negotiation processes and outcomes. Communication Monographs, 45, 247–257.
   Google Scholar
• Do no hue, W, A. (1981). Development of a model of rule use in negotiation interaction. Communication Monographs, 48, 262–276.
   Google Scholar
• Donohue, W. A., & Diez, M. E, (1983, May). Information management in negotiation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Dallas.
   Google Scholar
• Do no hue, W. A., & Diez, M. E. (1985). Directive use in negotiation interaction. Communication Monographs, 52, 305–318.
   Google Scholar
• Donohue, W. A., Diez, M. E., & Hamilton, M, (1984), Coding naturalistic negotiation interaction. Human Communication Research, 10, 403–426.
   Google Scholar
• Donohue, W. A., Diez, M. E., & Stahle, R. B. (1983). New directions in negotiation research. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.). Communication yearbook 7 (pp. 249–279). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, A. (1957), The peaceful settlement of industrial and intergroup disputes, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1, 69–81.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, A. (1962). Industrial peacemaking. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ericsson, K, A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215–251.
   Google Scholar
• Ervin-Tripp, S. (1976). Is Sybil there? The structure of some American English directives. Language in Society, 5, 25–66.
   Google Scholar
• Esser, I. K., & Kormorita, S. S. (1974). Reciprocal and non-reciprocal concession strategies in bargaining. Research and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1, 231–233.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. & Ury, W. R. (1981), Getting to yes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Folger, J, P., & Poole, M, S, (1984). Working through conflict: A communication perspective. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
   Google Scholar
• Follert, M. P. (1941). Constructive conflict. In H. C. Me teal f& L. Urwick (Eds.), Dynamic administration; The collected papers of Mary Parker Follert (pp. 3(M9). New York: Harper & Bros.
   Google Scholar
• Fossum, J. A. (I<rt9). Labor relations: Development, structure, and process. Dallas: Business Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Frey, R. L., & Adams, J. S. (1972). The negotiator’s dilemma: The simultaneous ingroup and outgroup conflict. Journ at of Experimental Social Psychology’, 8, 331–346.
   Google Scholar
• Gcffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago: Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg, J. A. (1983). A move toward describing conversational coherence. In R.T. Craig & K.Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence: Form, structure, and strategy (pp. 25–45). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, L, O. (1984). A cognitive approach to human communication: An action assembly theory. Communication Monographs, 51, 289–306.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, I. 0., <fc Lindzey, E. (1989). Encoding processes in multiple-goal messages. Human Communication Research, 16, 120–14–0.
   Google Scholar
• Greenwood, S. G. (1974). Opportunity to communicate and social orientation in imaginary-reward bargaining. Speech Monographs, 41, 49–81.
   Google Scholar
• Gulliver, P. H. (1979). Disputes and negotiations: A cross-cultural perspective. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guyer, M., & Rapopoil, A. A. (1970). Threat in a two-person jame. Journal of Experimental Social Psy chology, 6, 11–25.
   Google Scholar
• Haire, M. (1955). Role-perceptions in labor-management relations: An experimental approach. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 8, 204–216.
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D. (1987). Communication and the unconscious. In B. Dervin & M. J. \fcighl (Eds). Progress in communication sciences (Vol, 8, pp. 83–122). Norwood, NJ: Able*.
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D., & Dallinger, J. M. (1987). Individual differences in cognitive editing standards. Human Communication Research, 14, 123–144.
   Google Scholar
• Hawes, L. C., & Smith, D. H. (1973). A critique of assumptions underlying the study of communication in conflict. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 59, 423–435.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes-Roth, B., & Hayes-Roth, F. (1979). A cognitive model of planning. Cognitive Science, 3, 275–310.
   Google Scholar
• Hobbs, J, R., & Evans, D. A. (1980), Conversation as planned behavior. Cognitive Science, 4, 349–377.
   Google Scholar
• Ruber, V. L, & Neale, M. A. (1986). Effects of cognitive heuristics and goals on negotiator perform an c£ and subsequent goal setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 342–365.
   Google Scholar
• Ickes, W., Robertson, E. Toofce, W., &. Teng, G. (1986). Naturalistic social cognition: Methodology, assessment, and validation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 66–82.
   Google Scholar
• Jandt, F, E. (1985). Win-win negotiating: Turning conflict into agreement. New York: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Lick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action.Administratis Science Quarterly, 24, 602–611.
   Google Scholar
• Ke Hermann, K. (1984, November). Scripts: What are they, how do you know; and wky should you care? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Ke Hermann, K. (1987). Information exchange in social interaction. In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research (pp. 188–219). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Keogh, C. M. (1987). The nature and function of argument in organizational bargaining research. Southern States Speech Journal. 53, 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, S. I. (1984). Social cognitive determinants of face support in persuasive messages. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Uibana.
   Google Scholar
• Kochan, T. A., & Katz, H. C. (1988). Collective bargaining arid industrial relations: From theory to practice. Ho me wood, [L: Irwin.
   Google Scholar
• Lai, D. & Sebenius, J. (1986). The manager as negotiator. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leusch, R. F. (1976). Sources of power: Their impact on interchannel conflict. Journal of Marketing Research, 13, 382–390.
   Google Scholar
• Lewicki, R. J. & Littcrer, J. A. (1985), Negotiations. Ho me wood, IL: Irwin.
   Google Scholar
• McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). fdentities and interactions: An examination of human associations in everyday life. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, G. A. Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H, (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehan & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Morley, I., & Stephenson, G. (1977). The social psychology of bargaining. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Motley, M. T. (1986). Consciousness and intentional ity in communication: A preliminary model and methodological approaches. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 50, 3–23.
   Google Scholar
• Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1983). The role of perspective-taking ability in negotiating under different forms of arbitration. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 36, 378–388.
   Google Scholar
• Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1985a). The effect of externally set goals on reaching integrative agreements in competitive markets. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 6, 12–32.
   Google Scholar
• Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1985b), The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal. 28, 34–49.
   Google Scholar
• Neale, M. A., Huber, V, L., & Northcraft, G. 13.(1987). The framing of negotiations: Contextual versus task frames. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 228–241.
   Google Scholar
• Neu, J. (1988). Conversation structure: An exploration of bargaining behaviors in negotiation. Manage’ ment Communication Quarterly, 2, 23–45.
   Google Scholar
• Nisbett, R, E., it. Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review 84, 231–259.
   Google Scholar
• O’Keefe, B. I., & Delia, D. J. (1982). Impression formation and message production. In M, E. Roloff & C. R. Bergcr (Eds.), Social cognition and communication (pp. 33–72). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• O’Keefe, B. J., & Shepherd, G. J. (1987), The pursuit of multiple objectives in face-to-face persuasive interaction: Effects of construct differentiation on message organization. Communication Monographs, 54, 396–419.
   Google Scholar
• O’Keefe, D. J. (1977). Two concepts of argument. Journal of the American forensic Association, 13, 121–128.
   Google Scholar
• Organ, D. W. (1971). Some variables affecting boundary role behavior. Sociometry, 34, 524–537.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, E. (1955). Strategy and tactics in tabor negotiations. New London, CT: National Foremen’s Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Pruitt, D. G. (1981). Negotiation behavior. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pruitt, D. G, (1983). Integrative agreements: Nature and antecedents. In M. H. Bazerman & R. J. Ixwicki (Fds),Negotiating in organizations (pp. 35–50). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Pruitt, D. G., & Gleason, J. M. (1978). Threat capacity and the choice between independence and interdependence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 252–255.
   Google Scholar
• Pruitt, D. G., & Smith, D. L. (1981). Impression management in bargaining: Images of firmness and trustworthiness. In J. T. Tedcschi (Ed.), Impression management theory and social psychological research (pp. 247–267). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L. (1984). Bargaining as task and process: Multiple functions of interaction sequences. In R. L. Street & J. N. Cappella (F.ds,), Sequences and pattern in communicative behavior (pp. 225242). London: Edward Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L (1989). Bargaining, International Encyclopedia of Communication (Vol, 1, pp. 176–178). Amherst, PA: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L., & Jones, T. S. (1982a). The role of communication in bargaining. Human Communication Research, 8, 262–280.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L, L., & Jones, T. S. (1982b), Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction. Communication Monographs. 49, 171–191.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, I., L., Sl Wilson, S. R. (in press). Argumentation and bargaining strategies and discriminators of integrative outcomes. In A. Rahim(Ed,), Managing conflict: An interdisciplinary approach. New York: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L, Wilson, S. R., Wall man, M, S. & Turner, D. (1986). The evolution of case arguments in teachers* bargaining. Journal of the American Forensic A ssixia tton, 23, 63–82.
   Google Scholar
• Rackham, N., & Carlisle, I. (1978a). The effective negotiator: The behavior of successful negotiators. Journal of European Industrial Training, 2(6), 6–11.
   Google Scholar
• Rackham, N., & Carlisle, J. (1978b). The effective negotiator: Planning for negotiations. Journal of European Industrial Training, 2(7), 2–5.
   Google Scholar
• Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O. (1975). Argumentation and the decision making process. New York: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Roloff, M. E., & Campion, D. E. (1987). On alleviating the debilitating effects of accountability on bargaining: Authority and self-monitoring. Communication Monographs, 54, 145–164.
   Google Scholar
• Roloff, M. E., Tutzauer, F., & Dailey, W. O. (in press). The role of argumentation in distributive and integrative bargaining contexts: Seeking relative advantage but at what cost? In M. A. Rahim (Ed.), Managing conflict: An interdisciplinary approach. New York: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, J. C. (1983), Negotiation. American Behavioral Scientist, 27, 135–147.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, J. C., <fc Brown, B. (1975). The social psychology of bargaining and negotiation. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schank, R., & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Schelling. T. C. (1960), The strategy of conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schlenker, B. R , Helm, B., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1973). The effects of personality and situational variables on behavioral trust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 419–427.
   Google Scholar
• Scotlon, C. N., & Owsley, H. (1982). What about powerful questions? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, D. A. (1969). Communication and negotiation outcome. Journal of Communication, 19, 248–256.
   Google Scholar
• Spector, B. I. (1977). Negotiation as a psychological process. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 21, 607–618.
   Google Scholar
• SnjII, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1986), The role of chronic and temporary goals in social information processing. In R. M. Sorentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition; Foundations of social behavior (pp. 503–540), New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Tedeschi. J., Hiesler, D. S., & Gahagan, I. P. (1969). Trust and the prisoner’s dilemma game. Journal of Social Psychology, 79, 43–50.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, L., & Haiti e, R. (1987). Negotiators’ perceptions of the negotiation process. In B. H. Sheppard, M. H. Bazerman, &. R. J. Lewicki (Eds.), Research in negotiation in organizations (Vol. 2). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
   Google Scholar
• Tracy, K. T. (1984). The effects of multiple goals on conversational relevance and topic coherence. Communication Monographs, 57, 274–287.
   Google Scholar
• Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M, (1984). Studying organizational cultures through rites and ceremonies. Academy of Management Review, 9, 653–669.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, D. B. (1988). Imraorganizational bargaining: The effect of goal congruence and trust on negotiators’ strategy use. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W, (1983). Strategies for discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Von Cranach, M., Kalbermatten, U., Indermuhle, K., & Gugler, B. (1982). Goal-directed action. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, G. B. (1985). Ar£timentation and negotiation. In J, R. Co*, M. O. Sillars, & G. B. Walker (Eds.), Argumentation and social practice; Proceedings of the fourth SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 747–769). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, R. E, & McKeisie, R. B, (1965). A behavioral theory of labor negotiations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1985). Systematic observational methods. In G. Lindxey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 567–634). New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, S. R. (1987, November), Extending O’Keefe and Delia i view of message production: Arguments for a model of communicative goals and strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Boston.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, S. R. (1989, November). Situational moderators of priming and construct differentiation on interaction goals: A cognitive rules perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, San Francisco.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, W, (1971), Reciprocation and other techniques for inducing cooperation in the prisoner’s dierra game hyirrtii of Conflict Resolution, 15, 167–195.
   Google Scholar