Search results

Considers how non‐Thais can negotiate successfully withe business and government executives in Thailand. Gives an overview of Thailand’s geography, climate, population, religion and business practice. Discusses important aspects of the social‐cultural environment that have a significant effect on the way Thai’s negotiate. Includes further tips regarding body language, entertainment protocol, how to dress, and favourite negotiating tactics by buyers and sellers. Provides conclusions and directions for further research.

This paper considers the progress that has been made during the past sixty years or so in the social psychological study of conflict. It begins with a brief description of the influence of the writings of Darwin, Marx, and Freud, of game theory, and of studies of cooperation and competition as they affected the study of conflict. The main body of the paper summarizes the research bearing upon five major questions that have been the major foci of inquiry in this area during the past twenty‐five years: (1) What conditions give rise to a constructive or destructive process of conflict resolution? (2) What circumstances, strategies, and tactics lead one party to do better than another in a conflict situation? (3) What determines the nature of the agreement between conflicting parties, if they are able to reach agreement? (4) How can third parties be used to prevent conflicts from becoming destructive? (5) How can people be educated to manage their conflicts more constructively?

This paper is concerned with the difficult question of what our field can contribute to preventing and resolving the sorts of destructive conflicts which are so prevalent in our world today at the interpersonal, inter‐group, interethnic, and international levels. In this paper, I outline an approach to this question. The paper is divided into three parts. The first is a brief discussion of some of the factors which determine whether a conflict will take a constructive or destructive course. The second deals with the prevention of destructive conflicts—here I consider the potential roles of government, education, the media, religion, and industry. The third is concerned with how to manage intractable, destructive conflicts.

This review article focuses on the factors that affect the selection and implementation of three principles of distributive justice (i.e., equity, equality, and need) to reward systems in group and organizational settings. After presenting an overview of the assumptions, goals, and possible consequences associated with each of the three perspectives, the article then describes the moderating factors influencing distribution rule preferences across four levels of analysis: (1) the interorganizational, (2) the intraorganizational, (3) the work group, and (4) the individual. Some of the variables discussed include cross‐cultural differences, reward system implementation, task interdependency, work group climate, and individual characteristics. This material is then summarized through the use of a new conceptual model for describing allocation rule preferences. The article concludes with suggestions for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between major personality dimensions and attitudes towards peace and war.

Three samples – two consisting of British psychology students (n=64 and 121) and one of Israeli students (n=80), responded to measures of some or all of: five-factor inventory, SYMLOG trait form, general survey including authoritarianism; attitudes towards peace and war; specific attitudes towards peace and war policy.

The general attitude measures were associated with the specific attitudes. Both were associated with authoritarianism but not consistently with other personality dimensions.

Descriptive findings might not generalize and need contextualization. Authoritarianism should be measured in any studies of attitudes related to peace, war, conflict, and structural violence.

Practitioners of peace education may first need to address high authoritarianism and low integrative complexity. Also, countering structural violence related, for instance, to poverty or prejudice/discrimination may require a comprehensive approach including collaborative work with clinical psychologists applying both implicit and explicit assessment tools.

Documenting links (and lack of them) among personality variables and attitudes towards peace and war has practical and theoretical value – and may contribute to organizational schemes shaped by personality structure and bearing implications for negotiations. In terms of a paradigm by Morton Deutsch, our results show individual differences in, and associations among, variables relating to the remediable likelihood of parties being differentially likely to find themselves in negatively vs. positively interdependent situations; and carrying out effective instead of “bungling” actions.

Although mediation has increased considerably in popularity and usage, it lacks a coherent framework and evidence base to illuminate the conditions under which different types of mediation strategies are most effective. This has resulted in a wide array of strategies and tactics being offered to mediators, with little sense of which may work best under different conditions. This paper aims to further develop a contingency model of adaptive mediation.

The current paper extends previous research on adaptive mediation by presenting findings from focus group and survey research with experienced mediators that help to further develop and specify a new adaptive model of mediation.

The findings support the utility of a contingency model of adaptive mediation based on the four fundamental dimensions of mediation situations (conflict intensity, situational constraints, cooperative vs competitive disputant relationships and overt vs covert issues and processes) for better understanding and predicting changes in mediator strategies independent of mediator style preferences.

The present studies reflect the behavioral tactics experienced mediators recommend when facing the four distinct challenges to mediation. Research has yet to determine whether the sets of tactics recommended would actually be more successfully used in mediations presenting the four challenges. Subsequent research should assess the relative effects of the use of the different behavioral strategies under these conditions.

The program of research described and extended in this paper is an attempt to develop an integrative model of adaptive mediation, which can ultimately enhance the critical link between mediation research on the one hand and mediation practice on the other.

Hemisphericity in behaviour studies is the role and dominance of right bran/left brain in the human brain, each side of which has varying roles and characteristics, thereby leading to different thinking orientations in the human. A study was conducted to measure the hemisphericity orientation of construction and design engineers in a large public construction organization. We know from literature that people of different hemisphericity orientations have unlike personalities and dissimilar perspectives of specific situations. The essential characteristics of hemisphericity as established in literature are presented and used in analysing the organization. From this study of engineers, it was seen that construction engineers in the organization, State Department of Engineering Construction (SDEC), are predominantly left‐brained while design engineers are predominantly right‐brained. This difference in orientation partially explains why the design and construction engineers at SDEC are unable to see eye‐to‐eye in issues concerning implementation of drawings. Left hemisphere dominant engineers are also seen to desire more organizational changes than their right hemisphere dominant counterparts. Ideally, researchers believe that a 50–50 distribution of hemisphericities in large organizations is desirable. Details, analysis, and recommendations are presented in the paper.

Trust is a key concept in business, particularly in electronic commerce (e‐commerce). In order to understand online trust, one must first study trust research conducted in the offline world. The findings of such studies, dating from the 1950’s to the present, provide a foundation for online trust theory in e‐commerce. This paper provides an overview of the existing trust literature from the fields of philosophy, psychology, sociology, management, and marketing. Based on these bodies of work, online trust is briefly explored. The range of topics for future research in online trust in e‐commerce is presented.

The purpose of this paper is to propose that a more optimal regulatory focus in conflict reflects a mix of promotion and prevention considerations because conflict often elicits needs for promoting well-being as well as needs for preventing threats to security and interests. Two studies using distinct methodologies tested the hypothesis that social conflict is associated with better outcomes when the parties construe the conflict with a regulatory focus that reflects a combination of both promotion and prevention orientations.

Study 1 was an experiment that framed the same low-intensity conflict scenario as either prevention- or promotion-focused, or as both. In Study 2, we mouse-coded stream-of-thought accounts of participants’ actual ongoing high-intensity conflicts for time spent in both promotion and prevention focus.

In Study 1, the combined framing resulted in greater satisfaction with expected conflict outcomes and goal attainment than did either prevention or promotion framing alone. However, a promotion frame alone was associated with greater process and relationship satisfaction. These results were replicated in Study 2.

Prior research on regulatory focus has emphasized the benefits of a promotion focus over prevention when managing conflict. The present research offers new insight into how these seemingly opposing motives can operate in tandem to increase conflict satisfaction. Thus, this research illustrates the value of moving beyond dichotomized motivational distinctions in conflict research, to understand the dynamic interplay of how these distinctions may be navigated in concert for more effective conflict engagement. It also illustrates the value of mouse-coding methods for capturing the dynamic interplay of motives as they rise and fall in salience over time.

The present paper reviews the research literature on trust in bargaining and mediation. Several models of trust within the bargaining process are also described. It is concluded that trust means different things, depending upon the relationship under investigation. Trust among negotiators can refer to a personality trail (how trusting a negotiator is of others) or to a temporary state. Within the state perspective, trust often refers to one of three orientations: (1) cooperative motivational orientation (MO), (2) patterns of predictable behavior, (3) a problem‐solving orientation. Trust between a negotiator and constituents usually refers to a cooperative MO (i.e., shared loyalty) between these two groups. The addition of a mediator can impact both the opposing negotiators' relationship and each negotiator‐constituent relationship; the mediator also has direct and indirect relationships with the parties and their constituents. Future directions for research on trust are identified.