透视预测联盟组建的成功与否

IF 2.8 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL European Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1002/ejsp.3091
Anabela Cantiani, Ilja van Beest, Frans Cruijssen, Goos Kant, Thorsten M. Erle
{"title":"透视预测联盟组建的成功与否","authors":"Anabela Cantiani,&nbsp;Ilja van Beest,&nbsp;Frans Cruijssen,&nbsp;Goos Kant,&nbsp;Thorsten M. Erle","doi":"10.1002/ejsp.3091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Predominant economic theories of coalition formation assume that the best strategy during coalition negotiations is to approach as few partners as possible with self-serving offers that barely beat all other competitors while maximizing one's profit. Accordingly, to be included in a winning coalition, one needs to be able to predict others’ intentions, which is called perspective-taking. However, economists derived the idea that these strategies lead to success from observed coalition outcomes, rather than testing the role of perspective-taking empirically or modeling coalition negotiation dynamics. The present research revisits these theories from a psychological perspective within a novel coalition formation game that mimics common problems in horizontal supply chain collaboration. In line with theories of coalition formation, perspective-taking during the negotiation predicted higher inclusion in winning coalitions and higher monetary payoffs, but unexpectedly also longer negotiations. Contrary to predominant theories, perspective-taking led individuals to approach more partners and make other-serving offers, suggesting that successful coalition negotiations rely on different mechanisms than previously thought. These results are also practically relevant because companies often fail to orchestrate their transport flows, which leads to economic losses and environmental damage. These insights are valuable as they call for a psychological revision of predominant theories on coalition formation and shed light on how social behaviour influences horizontal collaboration in the transport sector. Furthermore, these findings underscore the potential of coalition-driven approaches in mitigating environmental consequences, offering a pathway toward sustainable practices in the face of climate challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":48377,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ejsp.3091","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perspective-taking predicts success in coalition formation\",\"authors\":\"Anabela Cantiani,&nbsp;Ilja van Beest,&nbsp;Frans Cruijssen,&nbsp;Goos Kant,&nbsp;Thorsten M. Erle\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ejsp.3091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Predominant economic theories of coalition formation assume that the best strategy during coalition negotiations is to approach as few partners as possible with self-serving offers that barely beat all other competitors while maximizing one's profit. Accordingly, to be included in a winning coalition, one needs to be able to predict others’ intentions, which is called perspective-taking. However, economists derived the idea that these strategies lead to success from observed coalition outcomes, rather than testing the role of perspective-taking empirically or modeling coalition negotiation dynamics. The present research revisits these theories from a psychological perspective within a novel coalition formation game that mimics common problems in horizontal supply chain collaboration. In line with theories of coalition formation, perspective-taking during the negotiation predicted higher inclusion in winning coalitions and higher monetary payoffs, but unexpectedly also longer negotiations. Contrary to predominant theories, perspective-taking led individuals to approach more partners and make other-serving offers, suggesting that successful coalition negotiations rely on different mechanisms than previously thought. These results are also practically relevant because companies often fail to orchestrate their transport flows, which leads to economic losses and environmental damage. These insights are valuable as they call for a psychological revision of predominant theories on coalition formation and shed light on how social behaviour influences horizontal collaboration in the transport sector. Furthermore, these findings underscore the potential of coalition-driven approaches in mitigating environmental consequences, offering a pathway toward sustainable practices in the face of climate challenges.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Social Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ejsp.3091\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.3091\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.3091","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于联盟形成的主流经济学理论认为,联盟谈判中的最佳策略是尽可能少地与合作伙伴接触,提出既能勉强击败所有其他竞争者,又能使自身利益最大化的自利提议。因此,要想加入获胜联盟,就必须能够预测他人的意图,这就是所谓的 "透视"(perspective-taking)。然而,经济学家们从观察到的联盟结果中得出了这些策略会带来成功的观点,而不是通过实证或联盟谈判动态模型来检验透视法的作用。本研究在模拟横向供应链合作中常见问题的新型联盟形成游戏中,从心理学角度重新审视了这些理论。与联盟形成理论一致的是,谈判过程中的视角选择预示着更高的获胜联盟加入率和更高的货币报酬,但出乎意料的是,谈判时间也更长。与主流理论相反,视角选择导致个体接触更多的合作伙伴并提出为他人服务的提议,这表明成功的联盟谈判所依赖的机制与之前所认为的不同。这些结果也具有现实意义,因为公司经常无法协调其运输流,从而导致经济损失和环境破坏。这些见解很有价值,因为它们要求对联盟形成的主要理论进行心理修正,并阐明社会行为如何影响运输行业的横向合作。此外,这些发现强调了联盟驱动方法在减轻环境后果方面的潜力,为面对气候挑战的可持续做法提供了一条途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Perspective-taking predicts success in coalition formation

Predominant economic theories of coalition formation assume that the best strategy during coalition negotiations is to approach as few partners as possible with self-serving offers that barely beat all other competitors while maximizing one's profit. Accordingly, to be included in a winning coalition, one needs to be able to predict others’ intentions, which is called perspective-taking. However, economists derived the idea that these strategies lead to success from observed coalition outcomes, rather than testing the role of perspective-taking empirically or modeling coalition negotiation dynamics. The present research revisits these theories from a psychological perspective within a novel coalition formation game that mimics common problems in horizontal supply chain collaboration. In line with theories of coalition formation, perspective-taking during the negotiation predicted higher inclusion in winning coalitions and higher monetary payoffs, but unexpectedly also longer negotiations. Contrary to predominant theories, perspective-taking led individuals to approach more partners and make other-serving offers, suggesting that successful coalition negotiations rely on different mechanisms than previously thought. These results are also practically relevant because companies often fail to orchestrate their transport flows, which leads to economic losses and environmental damage. These insights are valuable as they call for a psychological revision of predominant theories on coalition formation and shed light on how social behaviour influences horizontal collaboration in the transport sector. Furthermore, these findings underscore the potential of coalition-driven approaches in mitigating environmental consequences, offering a pathway toward sustainable practices in the face of climate challenges.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: Topics covered include, among others, intergroup relations, group processes, social cognition, attitudes, social influence and persuasion, self and identity, verbal and nonverbal communication, language and thought, affect and emotion, embodied and situated cognition and individual differences of social-psychological relevance. Together with original research articles, the European Journal of Social Psychology"s innovative and inclusive style is reflected in the variety of articles published: Research Article: Original articles that provide a significant contribution to the understanding of social phenomena, up to a maximum of 12,000 words in length.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information ‘(N)One of us but all of them!’ Ingroup favouritism on individual and group levels in the context of deviant behaviour Never again: Lessons of genocide in survivor testimonies from the Holocaust, Nanjing massacre and Rwandan genocide Age of the examiner and older people's memory performances: A test of the stereotype threat theory using variations on negative age stereotypes across 18 European countries Do women only apply when they are 100% qualified, whereas men already apply when they are 60% qualified?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1