期刊文献+

谈判中动机性信息加工理论述评

A Review of Motivated Information Processing Theory in Negotiation
下载PDF
导出
摘要 以往谈判研究多从认知或动机的单一视角切入,动机性信息加工(MIP)理论首次结合了认知视角和动机视角,探讨谈判的过程和机制。MIP理论由社会动机和求知动机两方面构成。社会动机指对谈判结果在自己与对方之间的特定分配的偏好,影响信息加工的选择和内容,求知动机指发展和保持对周围世界的精确和全面理解的意愿,影响信息加工的深度。MIP理论的谈判研究也取得了丰富的成果,如谈判策略的选择、信息选择的偏好等。同时,对未来的研究进行了展望。 To shift from the unilateral view, such as cognition or motivation, of previous negotiation researches to multilateral interaction view, MIP (Motivated Information Processing) combines the motive, the cognition, and discusses the process and mechanism of negotiations. MIP consits of social motivation and epistemic motivation. Social motivation is defined as the preference for aparticular distribution of outcomes between oneself and the counterpart, influencing the choice and the content of information processing. Epistemic motivation is defined as the desire to develop and hold a rich and accurate understanding of the world, influencing the depth of information processing. Negotiation researches based on MIP theory have obtained abundant and valuable resultsl such as choice of negotiation strategies, preference of information choice and so on. The research prospects are proposed at the end of the paper.
作者 叶飞
出处 《苏州教育学院学报》 2013年第2期91-94,共4页 Journal of Suzhou College of Education
关键词 动机性信息加工 社会动机 求知动机 motivated information processing social motivation epistemic motivation
  • 相关文献

参考文献18

  • 1DE DREU C K W, CARNEVALE P J D. Motivational bases for information processing and strategic choice in conflict and negotiation [M]. New York: Academic Press, 2003: 235-291.
  • 2韦庆旺,郑全全,俞国良.权力、社会动机和问责对谈判知觉、行为和结果的影响[J].应用心理学,2010,16(1):27-34. 被引量:5
  • 3WEINGART L R, BENNETT R J, BRETT J M. The impact of consideration of issues and motivational orientation on group negotiation process and outcome [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993( 78 ): 504-517.
  • 4DE DREU C K W, BEERSMA B, STROEBE K, et al. Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006(90): 927-943.
  • 5MCCLINTOCK C. Social motives in settings of outcome interdependence [J]. Negotiations : Social Psychological Perspective, 1977( 1 ): 49-77.
  • 6VAN LANGE P A M, KUHLMAN M D. Social value orientations and impressions of partner's honesty and intelligence: a test of might versus morality effect [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1994(67): 126-141.
  • 7BEERSMA B, DE DREU C K W. Social motives in integrative negotiation: the mediating influence of procedural fairness [J]. Social Justice Research, 2003( 16): 217- 239.
  • 8O'CONNOR K, CARNEVALE P J D. A nasty but effective negotiation strategy., misrepresentation of a common-value issue [J~. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1997 ( 23 ):504-515.
  • 9DE DREU C K W, WEINGART L R, KWON S. Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: a meta-analytic review and test of two theories[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000( 78 ): 889-905.
  • 10SCHULTZ J W, PRUITT D G. The effects of mutual concern on joint welfare [J] .Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1978( 14): 480- 492.

二级参考文献17

  • 1Van de Vliert,E.(1997).Complex interpersonal conflict behavior.London:Psychology Press.
  • 2Van Kleef,G.A.,De Dreu,C.K.W.,Pietroni,D.,& Manstead,A.S.R.(2006).Power and emotion in negotiation:Power moderates the interpersonal effects of anger and happiness on concession making.European Journal of Social Psychology,36,557-581.
  • 3Weingart,L.R.,Hyder,E.,& Prietula,M.J.(1996).Knowledge matters:The effect of tactical descriptions on negotiation behavior and outcome.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,70,1205-1217.
  • 4Weingart,L.R.,Brett,J.M.,Olekalns,M.,&Smith,P.L.(2007).Conflicting Social Motives in Negotiating Groups.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,93,994-1010.
  • 5Anderson,C.,& Thompson,L.L.(2004).Affect from the top down:How powerful individuals' positive affect shapes negotiations.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,95,125-139.
  • 6Beersma,B.,& De Dreu,C.K.W.(2002).Integrative and distributive negotiation in small groups:Effects of task structure,decision rule,and social motive.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,87,217-252.
  • 7De Dreu,C.K.W.,& Carnevale,P.J.(2003).Motivational bases for information processing and strategic choice in conflict and negotiation.In M.P.Zanna(Ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology(Vol.35,pp.235-291).New York:Academic Press.
  • 8De Dreu,C.K.W.,Koole,S.,Steinel,W.(2000b).Unfixing the fixed-pie:A motivated information processing of integrative negotiation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,79,975-987.
  • 9De Dreu,C.K.W.,Weingart,L.R.,& Kwon,S.(2000a).Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation:A meta-analytical review and test of two theories.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78,889-905.
  • 10Galinsky,A.D.,Magee,J.C.,Lnesi,M.E.,& Gruenfeld,D.H.(2006).Power and perspectives not taken.Psychological Science,17,1068-1074.

共引文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部