Social Justice Research

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 217–239 | Cite as

Social Motives in Integrative Negotiation: The Mediating Influence of Procedural Fairness



Although a large body of research has examined the influence of social motives on integrative negotiation, little is known about how social motives affect procedural fairness judgments in negotiation. In two experiments concerned with small group negotiation, we manipulated group members' social motives (pro-social vs. egoistic), and measured joint negotiation outcomes and procedural fairness. Experiment 1 showed that, compared to group members with an egoistic motivation, those with a pro-social motive experienced more procedural fairness, which was partly responsible for the higher joint outcomes they obtained. In Experiment 2, we manipulated social motives and decision rule. Results showed that pro-social groups experienced more procedural fairness than egoistic groups when a majority rule was applied, but not when a unanimity rule was applied.

group negotiation social motives procedural fairness 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allison, S. T., and Messick, D. M. (1990). Social decision heuristics in the use of shared resources. J. Behav. Decis. Making 3: 195-204.Google Scholar
  2. Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator—mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51: 1173-1182.Google Scholar
  3. Batson, C. D. (1998). Altruism and prosocial behavior. In Gilbert, D., Fiske, S.T., and Lindzey, G. (eds.), The handbook of Social Psychology, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA, Vol. 2, pp. 282-316.Google Scholar
  4. Batson, C. D., and Shaw, L. L. (1991). Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychol. Inquiry 2: 107-122.Google Scholar
  5. Beersma, B., and De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Integrative and distributive negotiation in small groups: Effects of task structure, decision rule and social motive. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 87: 227-252.Google Scholar
  6. Ben-Yoav, O., and Pruitt, D. (1984a). Resistance to yielding and the expectation of cooperative future interaction in negotiation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 34: 323-335.Google Scholar
  7. Ben-Yoav, O., and Pruitt, D. (1984b). Accountability to constituents: A two-edged sword. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 34: 283-295.Google Scholar
  8. Bies, R. J., and Tripp, T. M. (2002). Hot flashes, open wounds: Injustice and the tyranny of its emotions. In S. Gilliland, D., Steiner, and D. Skarlicki, (eds.) Emerging Perspecitves on Managing Organizational Justice, IAP Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 203-223.Google Scholar
  9. Boles, T. L., Croson, R. T. A., and Murnighan, J. K. (2000). Deception and retribution in repeated ultimatum bargaining. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 83: 235-259.Google Scholar
  10. Camac, C. (1992). Information preferences in a two-person social dilemma. In W. B. G., Liebrand, and D. M. Messick, (eds.), Social Dilemmas: Theoretical Issues and Research Findings. International Series in Experimental Social Psychology, Pergamon Press, Elmsford, NY, pp. 147-161.Google Scholar
  11. Caporael, L. R., Dawes, R. M., Orbell, J. M., and Van de Kragt, A. J. C. (1989). Selfishness examined: Cooperation in the absence of egoistic incentives. Behav. Brain Sci. 12: 683-739.Google Scholar
  12. Carnevale, P. J., and De Dreu, C. K. W. (2003). Motivational orientation moderates cognitive bias effects in negotiation. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  13. Carnevale, P. J. D., and Lawler, E. J. (1986). Time pressure and the development of integrative agreements in bilateral negotiations. J. Confl. Resolution 30: 636-659.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, J., and Cohen, P. (1983). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Erlbaum, Mahwah.Google Scholar
  15. Costa, P. T., and McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Odessa, TX, Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  16. Cropanzano, R., and Folger, R. (1989). Referent cognitions and task decision autonomy: Beyond equity theory. J. Appl. Psychol. 74: 293-299.Google Scholar
  17. De Cremer, D., and Van Lange, P. A. M. (2001). Why prosocials exhibit greater cooperation than proselfs: The roles of social responsibility and reciprocity. Eur. J. Pers. 15: 5-18.Google Scholar
  18. De Dreu, C. K. W., and Boles, T. L. (1998). Share and ahare alike or winner take all? The influence of social value orientation upon choice and recall of negotiation heuristics. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 76: 253-276.Google Scholar
  19. De Dreu, C. K. W., and Carnevale, P. J. (2003). Motivational bases of information processing and strategy in conflict and negotiation. In M. P., Zanna, (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 35, Academic Press, New York, pp 251-297.Google Scholar
  20. De Dreu, C. K. W., Giebels, E., and Van de Vliert, E. (1998). Social motives and trust in integrative negotiation: The disruptive effects of punitive capability. J. Appl. Psychol. 83: 408-422.Google Scholar
  21. De Dreu, C. K. W., and McCusker, C. (1997). Gain—loss frames and cooperation in two person social dilemmas: A transformational analysis. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72: 1093-1106.Google Scholar
  22. De Dreu, C. K. W., Weingart, L. R., and Kwon, S. (2000). Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: A meta-analytic review and test of two theories. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78: 889-905.Google Scholar
  23. Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. J. Confl. Resolution 2: 265-279.Google Scholar
  24. Deutsch, M. (1973). The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  25. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? J. Soc. Issu. 31: 137-149.Google Scholar
  26. Deutsch, M. (1982). Interdependence and psychological orientation. In V, Derlega, and J. Grzelak, (eds.) Cooperation and Helping Behavior, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. pp. 15-42.Google Scholar
  27. Druckman, D. (1994). Determinants of compromising behavior in negotiation. J. Confl. Resolution 38: 507-556.Google Scholar
  28. Eisenberg, N., and Miller, P.A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychol. Bull. 101: 91-119.Google Scholar
  29. Folger, R., and Martin, C. (1986). Relative deprivation and referent cognitions: Distributive and procedural justice effects. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 22: 531-546.Google Scholar
  30. Fry, W. R., Firestone, I. J., and Williams, D. L. (1983). Negotiation process and outcome of stranger dyads and dating couples: Do lovers lose? Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol., 4: 1-16.Google Scholar
  31. Greenberg, J. (1993). Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment inequity. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 54: 81-103.Google Scholar
  32. Greenberg, J. (1994). Using socially fair treatment to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. J. Appl. Psychol. 79: 288-297.Google Scholar
  33. Hare, A. P. (1976). Handbook of Small Group Research, (2nd edn), Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Hobbes, T. (1997). Leviathan: Authoritative text, backgrounds, interpretations, Norton, New York. (Original work published 1651)Google Scholar
  35. Kelley, H. H., and Stahelski, A. J. (1970). Social interaction basis of cooperators' and competitors' beliefs about others. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 16: 66-91.Google Scholar
  36. Kelley, H. H., and Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of Interdependence. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  37. Komorita, S. S., and Parks, C. D. (1995). Interpersonal relations: Mixed-motive interaction. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 46: 183-207.Google Scholar
  38. Kramer, R. M. (1991). The more the merrier? Social psychological aspects of multiparty negotiations in organizations. Res. Negotiation Organ. 3: 307-332.Google Scholar
  39. Kramer, R. M., Pommerenke, P., and Newton, E. (1993). The social context of negotiation. J. Confl. Resolution 37: 633-654.Google Scholar
  40. Krebs, D. L. (1970). Altruism: An examination of the concept and a review of the literature. Psycholo. Bull. 73: 258-302.Google Scholar
  41. Lax, D.A., and Sebenius, J.K. (1986). The Manager as Negotiator: Bargaining for Cooperation and Competitive Gain, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  42. Lind, E. A., and Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  43. Mannix, E. A., Thompson, L. L., and Bazerman, M. H. (1989). Negotiation in small groups. J. Appl. Psychol., 74: 508-517.Google Scholar
  44. McClintock, C. (1977). Social motives in settings of outcome interdependence. In D. Druckman, (ed.), Negotiations: Social Psychological Perspective, Sage, Beverly Hills. pp. 49-77.Google Scholar
  45. Miller, C.E., Jackson, P., Mueller, J., and Schersching, C. (1987). Some social psychological effects of group decision rules. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 52: 325-332.Google Scholar
  46. Morris, M. W., and Keltner, D. (2000). How emotions work: The social functions of emotional expression in negotiations. Res. Organ. Behav. 22: 1-50.Google Scholar
  47. Nash, J. F. (1950). The bargaining problem. Econometrica, 18: 155-162.Google Scholar
  48. Paese, P. W., and Yonker, R. D. (2001). Toward a better understanding of egocentric fairness judgments in negotiation. Int. J. Confl. Manage. 12: 114-131.Google Scholar
  49. Pillutla, M. M., and Murnighan, J. K. (1996). Unfairness, anger, and spite: Emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 68: 208-224.Google Scholar
  50. Pruitt, D. G. (1981). Negotiation Behavior, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Pruitt, D. G. (1998). Social conflict. In D., Gilbert, S. T., Fiske, and G. Lindzey, (eds.) Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th edn., McGraw-Hill, New York. Vol. 2, pp. 470-503.Google Scholar
  52. Pruitt, D. G., and Lewis, S. (1975). Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 31: 621-633.Google Scholar
  53. Rapoport, A. (1960). Fights, Games and Debates, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  54. Sattler, D. N., and Kerr, N. L. (1991). Might versus morality explored: Motivational and cognitive bases for social motives. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 60: 756-765.Google Scholar
  55. Schei, V. (2000, June). Negotiations in small groups: Are individualistic orientations collectively valuable? Paper presented at the 13th Conference of the International Association for Conflict Management, St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
  56. Schelling, T.C. (1960). The Strategy of Conflict, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  57. Schulz, J. W., and Pruitt, D. G. (1978). The effects of mutual concern on joint welfare. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 14: 480-491.Google Scholar
  58. Smith, A. (1976). An Inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, (Original work published 1776)Google Scholar
  59. Steinel, W., and De Dreu, C. K. W. (2003). Lying and deception in social interaction: The perception of other's competitiveness and own social value orientation. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  60. Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  61. Thompson, L., and Loewenstein, G. (1992). Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 51: 176-197.Google Scholar
  62. Thompson, L. L., Mannix, E. A., and Bazerman, M. H. (1988). Group negotiation: Effects of decision rule, agenda, and aspiration. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54: 86-95.Google Scholar
  63. Tjosvold, D. (1998). Cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: Accomplishments and challenges. Appl. Psychol. Int. Rev. 46: 285-342.Google Scholar
  64. Tripp, T. M. (1993). Power and fairness in negotiations. Soc. Justice Res. 6: 19-38.Google Scholar
  65. Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 67: 850-863.Google Scholar
  66. Tyler, T., Huo, Y. J., and Lind, E. A. (1999). The two psychologies of conflict resolution: Differing antacedents of pre-experience choices and post-experience evaluations. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 2: 99-118.Google Scholar
  67. Van den Bos, K., and Lind, E. A. (2001). The psychology of own versus others' treatment: Self-oriented and other-oriented effects on perceptions of procedural justice. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 27: 1324-1333.Google Scholar
  68. Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., and Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72: 95-104.Google Scholar
  69. Van Dijk, E., and Wilke, H. A. (1993). Differential interests, equity, and public good provision. J. Expe. Soc. Psychol. 29: 1-16.Google Scholar
  70. Van Dijk, E., and Wilke, H. (1994). Asymmetry of wealth and public good provision. Soc. Psychol. Q. 57: 352-359.Google Scholar
  71. Van Dijk, E., and Wilke, H. (1995). Coordination rules in asymmetric social dilemmas: A comparison between public good dilemmas and resource dilemmas. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 31: 1-27.Google Scholar
  72. Von Neumann, J., and Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  73. Weingart, L. R., Bennett, R. J., and Brett, J. M. (1993). The impact of consideration of issues and motivational orientation on group negotiation process and outcome. J. Appl. Psychol. 78: 504-517.Google Scholar
  74. Weingart, L. R., Brett, J. M., and Olekalns, M. (2001). Mixed motivational orientations in negotiating groups: Convergence and reaching agreement. Paper presented at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 13th Annual Conference, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
  75. Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., and Cropanzano, R. (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. J. Appl. Psychol. 84: 786-794.Google Scholar
  76. West, M. A., Borrill, C. S., and Unsworth, K. L. (1998). Team effectiveness in organizations. In C. L., Cooper, and I. T. Robertson, (eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 13, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  77. Winer, B. J. (1981). Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  78. Yamagishi, T. (1986). The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51: 110-116.Google Scholar
  79. Yamagishi, T., and Sato, K. (1986). Motivational bases of the public goods problem. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 67-73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations