Ïðèìå÷àíèÿ êíèãè: Ïñèõîëîãèÿ ïåðåãîâîðîâ. Êàê äîáèòüñÿ áîëüøåãî - ÷èòàòü îíëàéí, áåñïëàòíî. Àâòîð: Ìàðãàðåò Íèë, Òîìàñ Ëèñ

÷èòàòü êíèãè îíëàéí áåñïëàòíî
 
 

Îíëàéí êíèãà - Ïñèõîëîãèÿ ïåðåãîâîðîâ. Êàê äîáèòüñÿ áîëüøåãî

Ýòà êíèãà íàïèñàíà íå òîëüêî äëÿ òåõ, êîìó íðàâèòñÿ äîãîâàðèâàòüñÿ, íî è äëÿ òåõ, êòî ïåðåãîâîðîâ èçáåãàåò, à òàêæå äëÿ òåõ, êîìó ñëîæíî ïîíÿòü, óãàäàë îí èëè ïðîãàäàë, âñòóïèâ â ïåðåãîâîðû.  íåé íàøëè îòðàæåíèå ðåçóëüòàòû ýìïèðè÷åñêèõ èññëåäîâàíèé, êîòîðûå àâòîðû ïðîâîäèëè íà ïðîòÿæåíèè íåñêîëüêèõ äåñÿòèëåòèé, òùàòåëüíî àíàëèçèðóÿ ðàçëè÷íûå ñòðàòåãèè è ïðîâåðÿÿ èõ ýôôåêòèâíîñòü â ðàçëè÷íûõ óñëîâèÿõ ïðèìåíåíèÿ. Êíèãà áóäåò ïîëåçíà âñåì, êîìó ïðèõîäèòñÿ âñòóïàòü â ïåðåãîâîðû è âåñòè èõ – êàê íà ðàáîòå, òàê è â ïîâñåäíåâíîé æèçíè è â ñåìüå. Íà ðóññêîì ÿçûêå ïóáëèêóåòñÿ âïåðâûå.

Ïåðåéòè ê ÷òåíèþ êíèãè ×èòàòü êíèãó « Ïñèõîëîãèÿ ïåðåãîâîðîâ. Êàê äîáèòüñÿ áîëüøåãî »

Ïðèìå÷àíèÿ

1

 öåëÿõ ñîõðàíåíèÿ êîíôèäåíöèàëüíîñòè âñå èìåíà è ÷èñëà â ïðèâîäèìûõ ïðèìåðàõ áûëè èçìåíåíû. Çäåñü è äàëåå ïðèì. àâò.

2

Èçäàíû íà ðóññêîì ÿçûêå: Ëåâèòò Ñ., Äàáíåð Ñ. Ôðèêîíîìèêà. Ì.: Ìàíí, Èâàíîâ è Ôåðáåð, 2010; Àðèåëè Ä. Ïðåäñêàçóåìàÿ èððàöèîíàëüíîñòü. Ñêðûòûå ñèëû, îïðåäåëÿþùèå íàøè ðåøåíèÿ. Ì.: Ìàíí, Èâàíîâ è Ôåðáåð, 2010; Êàíåìàí Ä. Äóìàé ìåäëåííî… ðåøàé áûñòðî. Ì.: ÀÑÒ, Neoclassic, 2013. Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

3

Íà ðóññêîì ÿçûêå èçäàíà ïîä äðóãèì íàçâàíèåì: Ôèøåð Ð., Þðè Ó., Ïàòòîí Á. Ïåðåãîâîðû áåç ïîðàæåíèÿ. Ãàðâàðäñêèé ìåòîä. Ì.: Ìàíí, Èâàíîâ è Ôåðáåð, 2012. Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

4

Ïðåêðàñíûé ïðèìåð ýòîãî ôåíîìåíà îïèñàí â ïåðâîé ãëàâå êíèãè Äýíà Àðèåëè «Ïðåäñêàçóåìàÿ èððàöèîíàëüíîñòü. Ñêðûòûå ñèëû, îïðåäåëÿþùèå íàøè ðåøåíèÿ» (Ì.: Ìàíí, Èâàíîâ è Ôåðáåð, 2010). Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

5

 ýêîíîìè÷åñêîé íàóêå äåéñòâèå, êîòîðîå ïðèíîñèò ïîëüçó îäíîé èç ñòîðîí áåç óáûòêîâ äëÿ äðóãîé ñòîðîíû, íàçûâàåòñÿ ñëàáûì îïòèìóìîì Ïàðåòî. (Ïðîöåññ, êîòîðûé óëó÷øàåò áëàãîñîñòîÿíèå âñåõ ñòîðîí, íàçûâàåòñÿ ñèëüíûì îïòèìóìîì Ïàðåòî.) Êîíöåïöèÿ áûëà ðàçðàáîòàíà èòàëüÿíñêèì ýêîíîìèñòîì Âèëüôðåäî Ïàðåòî (1848–1923) äëÿ èçó÷åíèÿ ýêîíîìè÷åñêîé ýôôåêòèâíîñòè è ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ äîõîäîâ.

Âîçìîæíî, âû îáðàòèëè âíèìàíèå íà òî, ÷òî ìû èñïîëüçîâàëè óòî÷íÿþùåå ñëîâî «ïîòåíöèàëüíî», êîãäà ãîâîðèëè î âîçìîæíîñòè óëó÷øåíèÿ áëàãîñîñòîÿíèÿ õîòÿ áû îäíîé èç ñòîðîí áåç óùåðáà äëÿ äðóãîé. Êàê ìû óáåäèìñÿ â ãëàâå 6, ïðîöåññ ñîçäàíèÿ öåííîñòè ìîæåò ïðèâåñòè ê íåãàòèâíûì ïîñëåäñòâèÿì äëÿ îäíîé èç ñòîðîí, â ðåçóëüòàòå ÷åãî îíà îñòàíåòñÿ â ìåíåå âûãîäíîì ïîëîæåíèè, ÷åì â òîì ñëó÷àå, åñëè áû äîïîëíèòåëüíàÿ öåííîñòü íå ñîçäàâàëàñü âîâñå.

6

Íà ïðàêòèêå èç ýòîãî äîïóùåíèÿ ñëåäóåò, ÷òî Òîìàñó âñå ðàâíî, çàïëàòèò îí 160 äîëëàðîâ çà ïîêðûøêó ïðè óñëîâèè äîñòàâêè òîâàðà ÷åðåç 45 äíåé èëè 610 äîëëàðîâ (160 + 10 × 45), åñëè åìó èõ äîñòàâÿò ñèþ ìèíóòó. Ìû ïðèíèìàåì äàííîå äîïóùåíèå äëÿ ïðîñòîòû îïèñàíèÿ. Îäíàêî â ðåàëüíîé æèçíè æåëàíèå Òîìàñà òàê ðåçêî ïîâûñèòü öåíó, ñêîðåå âñåãî, ïîóáàâèëîñü áû âìåñòå ñ óìåíüøåíèåì ñðîêà äîñòàâêè (ñêàæåì, ñ 10 äîëëàðîâ çà ñîêðàùåíèå äîñòàâêè íà îäèí äåíü äî 8 äîëëàðîâ çà ñëåäóþùèé, è ò. ä.). Êîíå÷íî, âñå ýòî çâó÷àëî áû áîëåå ïðàâäîïîäîáíî, íî ÷åðåñ÷óð óñëîæíèëî áû íàì îáúÿñíåíèå áåç ñîîáùåíèÿ íîâîé öåííîé èíôîðìàöèè.

7

Íàçâàíèå êîìïàíèè, êîíå÷íî æå, âûìûøëåííîå.

8

* Âîïðîñ óñëîâèé îïëàòû ÿâëÿåòñÿ èíòåãðàòèâíûì, ïðè ýòîì îí áîëåå âàæåí äëÿ äèëåðà.  îòëè÷èå îò íåãî, âîïðîñ àóäèîñèñòåìû áîëåå âàæåí äëÿ ïîêóïàòåëÿ.

9

Äèëåð ìîã áû ïîïûòàòüñÿ âûðó÷èòü áîëåå âûñîêóþ öåíó (äèñòðèáóòèâíûé âîïðîñ) çà àâòîìîáèëü ñ áîëåå âûñîêîêëàññíîé àóäèîñèñòåìîé (èíòåãðàòèâíûé âîïðîñ), íî ïðè óâÿçûâàíèè àóäèîñèñòåìû ñî ñòàâêîé ôèíàíñèðîâàíèÿ (äðóãèì èíòåãðàòèâíûì âîïðîñîì) ìîæåò áûòü ñîçíàíà áîëüøàÿ öåííîñòü.

10

Êíèãà Äýíèåëà Àðèåëè «Ïðåäñêàçóåìàÿ èððàöèîíàëüíîñòü» äàåò ïðåêðàñíûé ïðèìåð òîãî, êàê ðàìêè ðàöèîíàëüíîãî ïîäõîäà ìîæíî ðàçäâèíóòü äî ìàñøòàáîâ, ïðè êîòîðûõ îí íà÷èíàåò îõâàòûâàòü è ñèñòåìàòè÷åñêóþ èððàöèîíàëüíîñòü.

11

 àíãëèéñêîì ÿçûêå ñëîâî lemon («ëèìîí») ïðèìåíèòåëüíî ê àâòîìîáèëÿì îçíà÷àåò «ðàçâàëþõà», íî â ðóññêîÿçû÷íóþ ýêîíîìè÷åñêóþ ëèòåðàòóðó íàçâàíèå çíàìåíèòîé ñòàòüè Äæ. Àêåðëîôà âîøëî èìåííî êàê «Ðûíîê “ëèìîíîâ”», à ïîòîìó â íàñòîÿùåì ïåðåâîäå òðàäèöèÿ áóäåò ñîõðàíåíà. Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

12

Äæóëèóñ Ãåíðè «Ãðàó÷î» Ìàðêñ (1890–1977) – àìåðèêàíñêèé àêòåð, ó÷àñòíèê çíàìåíèòîé êîìèê-òðóïïû «Áðàòüÿ Ìàðêñ». Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

13

Ìû ÷àñòî íàáëþäàåì ïðîÿâëåíèÿ òàêîãî òÿãîòåíèÿ ê ñðåäíåìó çíà÷åíèþ ìåæäó äâóìÿ îòïðàâíûìè öåíàìè, õîòÿ íåò íèêàêèõ ïðè÷èí ñ÷èòàòü ñðåäíåå ëó÷øèì èëè áîëåå ñïðàâåäëèâûì, ÷åì ëþáîå äðóãîå çíà÷åíèå ìåæäó äâóìÿ îòïðàâíûìè öåíàìè. Äàæå åñëè âû ñî÷òåòå ñðåäíåå çíà÷åíèå áîëåå «ñïðàâåäëèâûì», òî, ÷òîáû åãî ðàññ÷èòàòü, âàì íåîáõîäèìî áóäåò çíàòü îáå îòïðàâíûå öåíû, à ýòî êðàéíå ìàëîâåðîÿòíî.

14

Íà ñàìîì äåëå ðàöèîíàëüíûå ïîêóïàòåëè ïîéìóò, ÷òî â òàêîé ñèòóàöèè íå ñëåäóåò äåëàòü íèêàêèõ ïðåäëîæåíèé: èíôîðìàöèîííàÿ àñèììåòðèÿ ñëèøêîì âåëèêà, ÷òîáû êîìïåíñèðîâàòüñÿ çà ñ÷åò 50-ïðîöåíòíîé ñèíåðãèè. Íàïðèìåð, åñëè áû âû ïðåäëîæèëè öåíó â 30 äîëëàðîâ è îíà áûëà áû ïðèíÿòà, òî ñîãëàñèå ñîáñòâåííèêà ñâèäåòåëüñòâîâàëî áû î òîì, ÷òî íåôòè ó íåãî ìåíüøå, ÷åì íà 30 äîëëàðîâ â ïåðåðàñ÷åòå íà àêöèþ, èëè â ñðåäíåì íà 15 äîëëàðîâ.  òàêîì ñëó÷àå äîáàâëåíèå 50 ïðîöåíòîâ îò ñèíåðãåòè÷åñêîãî ýôôåêòà ïðèâåäåò ê îæèäàåìîé ïîòåðå â 7,50 äîëëàðà íà àêöèþ. Íà ñàìîì äåëå îæèäàåìàÿ ñèíåðãèÿ äîëæíà áûòü íà óðîâíå êàê ìèíèìóì 100 ïðîöåíòîâ, ÷òîáû ðàññ÷èòûâàòü íà òî, ÷òî âû äîñòèãíåòå õîòÿ áû óðîâíÿ áåçóáûòî÷íîñòè.

15

Ïîñêîëüêó îòïðàâíàÿ öåíà ïîêàçûâàåò óðîâåíü, ïðè êîòîðîì âàì âñå ðàâíî, çàêëþ÷èòå âû ñäåëêó èëè íåò, ïàðòíåðó âûãîäíåå ïðåäëîæèòü âàì íåìíîãî áîëüøå.

16

Âñïîìíèòå, ÷òî ïî óñëîâèÿì ïðèìåðà èç ãëàâû 2 ñóììà â 30 äîëëàðîâ áûëà âàøåé îòïðàâíîé öåíîé çà îäèí òåàòðàëüíûé áèëåò!

17

 Àâñòðàëèè, íàïðèìåð, æèëàÿ íåäâèæèìîñòü íå âûñòàâëÿåòñÿ íà ïðîäàæó â êàòàëîãàõ, êàê ýòî äåëàåòñÿ â ÑØÀ, à ïðîäàåòñÿ ñ àóêöèîíà. Òàêèì îáðàçîì, àâñòðàëèéñêèå ïðîäàâöû íå äåëàþò «ïåðâîãî ïðåäëîæåíèÿ». Ïîëó÷àåòñÿ, ÷òî ïîòåíöèàëüíûå ïîêóïàòåëè ïåðâûìè íàçíà÷àþò öåíó.

18

Èçäàíà íà ðóññêîì ÿçûêå: Êàíåìàí Ä. Äóìàé ìåäëåííî… ðåøàé áûñòðî. Ì.: ÀÑÒ, Neoclassic, 2013. Ïðèì. ðåä.

19

Ìÿíüöçû, èëè ìÿíü (êèò.), – «ëèöî» â çíà÷åíèè «÷åñòü, äîñòîèíñòâî, äîáðîå èìÿ, ñîöèàëüíûé ñòàòóñ, ñàìîóâàæåíèå» (â îòëè÷èå îò «ëÿíü» – «ëèöî» êàê ÷àñòü òåëà). Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

20

Âñïîìíèì áàëëàäó Ãåòå «Ó÷åíèê ÷àðîäåÿ», íàïèñàííóþ èì â 1797 ãîäó. Âêðàòöå, â íåé âåëèêèé ïîýò ïðåäëàãàåò, ÷òîáû «äóõè äëÿ äåëà âûçûâàë ëèøü êîëäóí óìåëûé».

21

 íàó÷íîé ëèòåðàòóðå ìîæíî âñòðåòèòü è äðóãèå âàðèàíòû íàçâàíèÿ ýòîé ñèñòåìû, íàïðèìåð: «ñèñòåìà ïðèáëèæåíèÿ ïîâåäåíèÿ» èëè «ñèñòåìà ïðèáëèæàþùåãî ïîâåäåíèÿ». Ïðèì. ðåä.

22

Ðîññèéñêîìó ÷èòàòåëþ Áîá Âóäâîðä èçâåñòåí êíèãàìè «Âñÿ ïðåçèäåíòñêàÿ ðàòü» è «Ïðèçíàíèå øåôà ðàçâåäêè». Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

23

Ïðîäîëæàÿ ÷èòàòü, íå çàáûâàéòå: èíîãäà ÷òî-òî áûâàåò ëåãêî îáúÿñíèòü, íî íå òàê ëåãêî ðåàëèçîâàòü!

24

Àôôèëèàöèÿ (îò àíãë. affiliation – ïðèñîåäèíåíèå, ÷ëåíñòâî) – ïîòðåáíîñòü ÷åëîâåêà íàõîäèòüñÿ â ýìîöèîíàëüíî çíà÷èìûõ ñâÿçÿõ ñ äðóãèìè ëþäüìè. Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

25

Âñïîìíèòå, ÷òî ìû ãîâîðèëè ðàíåå î ñèñòåìå àêòèâàöèè ïîâåäåíèÿ (ÑÀÏ) è ñèñòåìå òîðìîæåíèÿ ïîâåäåíèÿ (ÑÒÏ). Âïîëíå î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî àêòèâàöèÿ ïîâåäåíèÿ ÷àùå íàáëþäàåòñÿ ó òåõ, êòî ÷óâñòâóåò ñåáÿ ñèëüíåå èëè æå ïñèõîëîãè÷åñêè íàñòðîèëñÿ íà òî, ÷òîáû âåñòè ñåáÿ êàê ÷åëîâåê ñ ñèëüíîé ïîçèöèåé.

26

 2005 ãîäó òðàäèöèîííàÿ (ñ 1998 ãîäà) ìåæäóíàðîäíàÿ õóäîæåñòâåííàÿ àêöèÿ «Ïàðàä êîðîâ» ïðîõîäèëà â íåñêîëüêèõ ãîðîäàõ Åâðîïû, â òîì ÷èñëå è â Ìîñêâå, íî ÿâíî ïîíðàâèëàñü ìîñêâè÷àì è ãîñòÿì ñòîëèöû íå òàê ñèëüíî, êàê æèòåëÿì ×èêàãî. ×àñòü êîðîâ «ïàëà» îò ðóê âàíäàëîâ, ÷àñòü «ïàñëàñü» ó âõîäà Äîìà êíèãè íà Íîâîì Àðáàòå åùå ïî÷òè öåëûé ãîä. Ïðèì. ïåðåâ.

27

Êàê ïðàâèëî, ãîâîðÿ îá àóêöèîíàõ, ìû ïðåäñòàâëÿåì ñåáå îäíîãî ïðîäàâöà è ìíîæåñòâî ïîêóïàòåëåé. Ýòî áîëåå ïðèâû÷íàÿ ôîðìà, õîòÿ áûâàþò è îáðàòíûå âàðèàíòû, êîãäà ïîêóïàòåëü îäèí, à ïðîäàâöîâ – ìíîãî. Ïðèìåðîì òîìó ìîãóò ñëóæèòü ãîñçàêóïêè. Íåäàâíî êîðïîðàöèÿ General Motors îáúÿâèëà îá îòêàçå îò îáû÷íîãî ñîòðóäíè÷åñòâà ñ ïîñòàâùèêàìè è ïåðåõîäå âïðåäü íà àóêöèîííóþ ñèñòåìó çàêóïêè àâòîìîáèëüíûõ äåòàëåé. Âñòðå÷àþòñÿ è äðóãèå âàðèàíòû. Òàê, áèðæè, íàïðèìåð Íüþ-Éîðêñêàÿ ôîíäîâàÿ áèðæà, ñîáèðàþò âìåñòå ìíîæåñòâî ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ïîêóïàòåëåé è ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ïðîäàâöîâ.

28

Ðàâíîìåðíûì íàçûâàåòñÿ òàêîå ðàñïðåäåëåíèå, ïðè êîòîðîì âñå ðåçóëüòàòû îäèíàêîâî âåðîÿòíû.

29

Ðàçóìååòñÿ, àâòîð ïðèâîäèò äîñòóïíûå äàííûå íà ìîìåíò íàïèñàíèÿ êíèãè. Åæåãîäíî ÷èñëåííîñòü íàñåëåíèÿ êàæäîé ñòðàíû ìåíÿåòñÿ. Ïðèì. ðåä.

30

Íàïîìíèì, ÷òî îïòèìàëüíûì ïî Ïàðåòî ñ÷èòàåòñÿ òàêîå ñîãëàøåíèå, êîòîðîå çàíèìàåò ãëàâåíñòâóþùåå ïîëîæåíèå ïî îòíîøåíèþ ê äðóãèì ïîòåíöèàëüíûì ñîãëàøåíèÿì. Èíà÷å ãîâîðÿ, íåò íè îäíîãî äðóãîãî ñîãëàøåíèÿ, êîòîðîå âñå ïåðåãîâîðùèêè ïðåäïî÷ëè áû óæå âûáðàííûì.

1

Tuncel E., Mislin A., Desebir S., Pinkley R. The Agreement Bias: Why Negotiators Prefer Bad Deals to No Deal at All. – Working paper, St. Louis, MO: Webster University, 2013.

2

Ñòóäåíòû ÷àñòî ñïðàøèâàþò î òîì, çíàë ëè äîêòîð, ÷òî åãî ïàòåíò â áëèæàéøåå âðåìÿ ñòàíåò áåñïîëåçíûì, èëè ýòî áûëî ÷èñòîé âîäû ñîâïàäåíèåì. Íàøå ïðèçíàíèå â òîì, ÷òî íàì ýòî íå èçâåñòíî (è ïîäîçðåâàåì, ÷òî íàø êëèåíò òîæå íå ñìîã áû äàòü îòâåò), èõ îãîð÷àåò.  êîíöå êîíöîâ, äëÿ èäåè, êîòîðóþ ìû ïûòàåìñÿ äîíåñòè, íå èìååò íèêàêîãî çíà÷åíèÿ, çíàë äîêòîð î êîíêóðèðóþùåì ïàòåíòå èëè íåò. Îïèñàííàÿ ñèòóàöèÿ ïðîñòî ïîçâîëÿëà ïðîâåñòè ïåðåîöåíêó è âûÿñíèòü, ÷òî ñ ó÷åòîì âîçìîæíîñòè ïîÿâëåíèÿ íîâîãî ïàòåíòà ïîêóïêà ïðàâ íà èçîáðåòåíèå áûëà áû íå ëó÷øèì ðåøåíèåì.

3

Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever, Women Don’t Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide (Princeton, NJ: Prince ton University Press, 2003).

4

 1970 ãîäó æåíùèíû ïîëó÷àëè 59 öåíòîâ çà ðàáîòó, çà êîòîðóþ ìóæ÷èíàì ïëàòèëè 1 äîëëàð. Ê 2010 ãîäó ïðîïîðöèÿ ñîñòàâèëà 77 öåíòîâ ê äîëëàðó. (Hegewisch A., Williams C., Henderson A. The Gender Wage Gap 2010. – Institute for Women’s Policy Research Fact Sheet. – April, 2011. – URL: http://www.lwpr.org/publications/pubs/the-gender-wage-gap-2010-updated-march-2011).

5

Schmidt M.S. TENNIS: Upon Further Review, Players Support Replay // New York Times, Section D, 2. – 05.09.2006.

6

Shiv B., Plassmann H., Rangel A., O’Doherty J. Marketing actions can modulate neural representations of experienced pleasantness // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – Îïóáëèêîâàíî íà ñàéòå 14.01.2008.

7

Rosenthal Robert. Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils’ Intellectual Development. – 1968.

8

Steele C. M., Aronson J. Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1995. – ¹ 69(5). – P. 797–811.

9

Shih M., Pittinsky T. L., Ambady N. Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance // Psychological Science. – 1999. – ¹ 10. – P. 81–84.

10

Belliveau M.A. Engendering inequity? How social accounts create versus merely explain unfavorable pay outcomes for women // Organizational Science. – 2012. – ¹ 23. – P. 1154–1174.

11

Reilly H. B., Babcock L., McGinn K. L. Constraints and triggers: Situational mechanisms of gender in negotiation // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2005.

12

Kray L. L., Thompson L., Galinsky A. Battle of the sexes: Stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 80(6). – P. 942–958; Kray L., Galinksy A., Thompson L. Reversing the gender gap in negotiation // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process. – 2002. – ¹ 87. – P. 386–410.

13

Tuncel E., Mislin A., Desebir S., Pinkley R. The Agreement Bias: Why Negotiators Prefer Bad Deals to No Deal at All // Working paper, St. Louis, MO: Webster University, 2013.

14

R. L. Pinkley, M. A. Neale, and R. J. Bennett, “The Impact of Alternatives to Settlement in Dyadic Negotiation,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 57, no. 1 (1994): 97–116.

15

Morris M. W., Larrick R. P., Su S. K. Misperceiving negotiation counterparts: When situationally determined bargaining behaviors are attributed to personality traits // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, – 1999. – ¹ 77(1). – P. 52.

16

Ìîæíî ïîñïîðèòü î íåîäíîçíà÷íîñòè öåíû áðîíèðîâàíèÿ. Íàïðèìåð, ÷òî, åñëè çàÿâëåííàÿ öåíà ñîñòàâëÿåò 28 +/– 2 äîëëàðà? Íà äåëå æå ýòî îçíà÷àåò, ÷òî öåíà áðîíèðîâàíèÿ áóäåò ìåíåå 30 äîëëàðîâ è íè öåíòîì áîëüøå! Ïîäðîáíåå áðîíèðóåìûå öåíû ìû ðàññìîòðèì â ãëàâå 3.

17

Huber V. L., Neale M. A. Effects of self and competitor goals on performance in an interdependent bargaining task // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 1987. – ¹ 72(2). – P. 197; Huber V. L., Neale M. A. Effects of cognitive heuristics and goals on negotiator performance and subsequent goal setting // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1986. – ¹ 38(3). – P. 342–365.

18

Pinkley R. L., Neale M. A., Bennett R. J. The impact of alternatives to settlement in dyadic negotiation // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1994. – ¹ 57(1). – P. 97–116.

19

Wiltermuth S. S., Neale M. A. Too much information: The perils of nondiagnostic information in negotiations // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2011. – ¹ 96(1). – P. 192.

20

Galinsky A., Mussweiler T., Medvec, V. Disconnecting outcomes and evaluations in negotiation. The role of negotiator focus // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2002. – ¹ 83. – P. 1131–1140.

21

Pruitt D. G. Negotiation behavior (Vol. 47). – New York: Academic Press, 1981.

22

Tuncel E., Mislin A., Desebir S., Pinkley R. The Agreement Bias: Why Negotiators Prefer Bad Deals to No Deal at All // Working paper. – St. Louis, MO: Webster University, 2013.

23

Wiltermuth S., Tiedens L. Z., Neale M. A. Dominance complementarily in negotiations. Symposium presentation. – Academy of Management annual meeting, San Antonio, TX, 2011.

24

Messick D. M., McClintock C. G. Motivational bases of choice in experimental games // Journal of experimental social psychology. – 1968. – ¹ 4(1). – P. 1–25.

25

Ïîäðîáíåå îá ýòîé ñòðàòåãèè ñîçäàíèÿ öåííîñòè ñì. Bazerman M. H., Gillespie J. J. Betting on the future: The virtues of contingent contracts // Harvard Business Review. – 1999. – September – October.

26

Polzer Jeffrey T., Neale Margaret A. Constraints or catalysts? Reexamining goal setting within the context of negotiation // Human Performance. – 1995. – ¹ 8. – P. 3–26.

27

Marks G., Miller N. Ten years of research on the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review // Psychological Bulletin. – 1987. – ¹ 102(1). – P. 72.

28

Cao J., Phillips K. W. Team diversity and information acquisition: How homogeneous teams set themselves up to have less conflict // Working paper, Columbia Business School. – 2013.

29

Stuhlmacher A. F., Walters A. E. Gender differences in negotiation outcome: A meta-analysis // Personnel Psychology. – 1999. – 52(3). – P. 653–677; Bowles H. R., Babcock L., McGinn K. L. Constraints and triggers: situational mechanics of gender in negotiation // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2005. – 89(6). – P. 951.

30

Morris M. W., Larrick R. P., Su S. K. Misperceiving negotiation counterparts: When situationally determined bargaining behaviors are attributed to personality traits // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1999. – ¹ 77(1). – P. 52.

31

Wilson T., Lisle D., Wetzel C. Preferences as expectations-driven inferences: Effects of affective expectations on affective experiences // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1989. – ¹ 56. – P. 519–530.

32

Lee L., Frederick S., Ariely D. Try it, You’ll like it // Psychological Science. – 2006. – ¹ 17. – P. 1054–1058.

33

Tinsley C. H., O’Connor K. M., Sullivan B. A. Tough guys finish last: The perils of a distributive reputation // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2002. – ¹ 88(2). – P. 621–642; Neale M. A., Fragale A. R. Social cognition, attribution, and perception in negotiation: The role of uncertainty in shaping negotiation processes and outcomes // Negotiation theory and research. – 2006. – P. 27–54.

34

Staw B. M., Sandelands L. E., Dutton J. E. Threat rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis // Administrative science quarterly. – 1981. – P. 501–524; Ocasio W. The enactment of economic adversity – a reconciliation of theories of failure-induced change and threat-rigidity // Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews. – 1995. – Vol. 17. – P. 287–331.

35

Kruglanski A. W. The psychology of being “right”: The problem of accuracy in social perception and cognition // Psychological Bulletin. – 1989. – ¹ 106. – P. 395–409.

36

Kruglanski A. W., Webster D. M. Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing and freezing” // Psychological Review. – 1996. – ¹ 103. – P. 263–283; Mayseless O., Kruglanski A. W. What makes you so sure? Effects of epistemic motivations on judgmental confidence // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1987. – ¹ 39. – P. 162–183; Webster D., Kruglanski A. W. Individual differences in need for cognitive closure // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1994. – ¹ 67. – P. 1049–1062.

37

De Dreu C. K. W. Time pressure and closing of the mind in negotiation // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2003. – ¹ 91. – P. 280–295.

38

Dual-process theories in social psychology / Chaiken S., Trope Y. (Eds.). – New York: Guilford Press, 1999.

39

Lerner J. S., Tetlock P. E. Accounting for the effects of accountability // Psychological Bulletin. – 1999. – ¹ 125. – P. 255–275; Tetlock P. E. The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: Toward a social contingency model // Advances in experimental social psychology / L. Berkowitz (Ed.). – New York: Academic Press, 1992. – Vol. 25. – P. 331–376.

40

Petty R. E., Cacioppo J. T. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion // Advances in experimental social psychology / L. Berkowitz (Ed.). – New York: Academic Press, 1986. – Vol. 19. – P. 123–205.

41

De Dreu C. K. W., Koole S., Steinel W. Unfixing the fixed-pie: A motivated information processing of integrative negotiation // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2000. – ¹ 79. – P. 975–987.

42

Íî äàæå â òàêîé ýêñòðåìàëüíîé ñèòóàöèè, êàê ïîêàçûâàþò èññëåäîâàíèÿ, äèêòàòîðû õîòÿ áû îò÷àñòè ïðèíèìàþò â ðàñ÷åò èíòåðåñû ñâîèõ «ïîä÷èíåííûõ». Ïîäðîáíåå ñì., íàïðèìåð: Cason T. N., Mui V. L. Social influence in the sequential dictator game // Journal of Mathematical Psychology. – 1998. – ¹ 42(2). – P. 248–265; Bolton G. E., Katok E., Zwick R. Dictator game giving: Rules of fairness versus acts of kindness // International Journal of Game Theory. – 1998. – ¹ 27(2). – P. 269–299.

43

Güth W., Tietz R. Ultimatum bargaining behavior: A survey and comparison of experimental results // Journal of Economic Psychology. – 1990. – ¹ 11(3). – P. 417–449.

44

Henrich J. Does culture matter in economic behavior? Ultimatum game bargaining among the Machiguenga of the Peruvian Amazon // American Economic Review. – 2000. – P. 973–979; Oosterbeek H., Sloof R., Van De Kuile G. Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis // Experimental Economics. – 2004. – ¹ 7(2). – P. 171–188.

45

Solnick S. J. Gender differences in the ultimatum game // Economic Inquiry. – 2001. – ¹ 39(2). – P. 189–200.

46

Ball S. B., Bazerman M. H., Carroll J. S. An evaluation of learning in the bilateral winner’s curse // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1991. – ¹ 48(1). – P. 1–22.

47

White S. B., Neale M. A. The role of negotiator aspirations and settlement expectancies in bargaining outcomes // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1994. – ¹ 57(2). – P. 303–317.

48

Messick D. M., McClintock C. G. Motivational bases of choice in experimental games // Journal of experimental social psychology. – 1968. – ¹ 4(1). – P. 1–25.

49

Miller N. G., Sklarz M. A. Pricing strategies and residential property selling prices // Journal of Real Estate Research. – 1987. – ¹ 2(1). – P. 31–40.

50

Slovic P., Lichtenstein S. Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment // Organizational behavior and human performance. – 1971. – ¹ 6(6). – P. 649–744.

51

Tversky A., Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases // Science. – 1974. – ¹ 185. – P. 1124–1131.

52

Northcraft G. B., Neale M. A. Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring and adjustment perspective on property price decisions // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1986. – ¹ 39. – P. 228–241.

53

Einhorn H. J., Hogarth R. M. Ambiguity and uncertainty in probabilistic inference // Psychological Review. – 1985. – ¹ 92. – P. 433–461.

54

Galinsky Adam D., Mussweiler Thomas. First offers as anchors: the role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2001. – Vol. 81. – ¹ 4. – P. 657; Galinsky A. D., Mussweiler T., Medvec V. H. Disconnecting outcomes and evaluations: The role of negotiator focus // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2002. – ¹ 83. – P. 1131–1140.

55

Huber V. L., Neale M. A. Effects of cognitive heuristics and goals on negotiator performance and subsequent goal setting // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1986. – ¹ 38(3). – P. 342–365.

56

Öèò. ïî: Galinsky Adam D., Mussweiler Thomas.

57

Langer E. J., Blank A., Chanowitz B. The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: The role of “placebic” information in interpersonal interaction // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1978. – ¹ 36(6). – P. 635; Bies R. J., Shapiro D. L. Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts // Social Justice Research. – 1987. – ¹ 1(2). – P. 199–218.

58

Epley N., Gilovich T. Putting adjustment back in the anchoring and adjustment heuristic: Differential processing of self-generated and experimenter-provided anchors // Psychological Science. – 2001. – ¹ 12. – P. 391–396; Epley N., Gilovich T. When effortful thinking influences judgmental anchoring: Differential effects of forewarning and incentives on self-generated and externally provided anchors // Journal of Behavioral Decision making. – 2005. – ¹ 18. – P. 199–212; Epley N., Gilovich, T. The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient // Psychological Science. – 2006. – ¹ 17. – P. 311–318.

59

Mason M. F., Lee A. J., Wiley E. A., Ames D. R. Precise offers are potent anchors: Conciliatory counteroffers and attributions of knowledge in negotiations // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 2013. – ¹ 49(4). – P. 759–763; Janiszewski C., Dan Uy. Precision of the anchor influences the amount of adjustment // Psychological Science. – 2008. – ¹ 19. – P. 121–127.

60

Galinsky A. D., Seiden V., Kim P. H., Medvec V. H. The dissatisfaction of having your first offer accepted: The role of counterfactual thinking in negotiations // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. – 2002. – ¹ 28. – P. 271–283.

61

Simonsohn U., Ariely D. When rational sellers face nonrational buyers: Evidence from herding on eBay // Management Science. – 2008. – 54(9). – P. 1624–1637.

62

De Dreu C. K. W., Boles T. L. Share and share alike or winner take all? The influence of social value orientation upon choice and recall of negotiation heuristics // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1998. – ¹ 76. – P. 253–276; Kleef G. A. van, De Dreu C. K. W. Social value orientation and impression formation: A test of two competing hypotheses about information search in negotiation // International Journal of Conflict Management. – 2002. – ¹ 13. – P. 59–77.

63

Curhan J. R., Neale M. A., Ross L. Dynamic valuation: Preference changes in the context of a face-to-face negotiation // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 2004. – ¹ 40. – P. 142–151; Ma’oz I., Ward A., Katz M., Ross L. Reactive devaluation of an “Israeli” vs. “Palestinian” peace proposal // Journal of Conflict Resolution. – 2002. – ¹ 46. – P. 515–546; Ross L. Reactive devaluation in negotiation and conflict resolution // Barriers to conflict resolution / K. Arrow, R. H. Mnookin, L. Ross, A. Tversky, R. Wilson (Eds.). – New York: W. W. Norton, 1995. – P. 26–42; Ross L., Ward A. Psychological barriers to dispute resolution // Advances in experimental social psychology / M. Zanna (Ed.). – San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1995. – Vol. 27. – P. 255–304; Lee Ross, Stillinger Constance. Barriers to conflict resolution // Negotiation Journal. – 1991. – ¹ 8. – P. 389–404.

64

Kwon S., Weingart L. Unilateral concession from the other party: Concession behavior, attributions and negotiation judgments // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2004. – ¹ 89. – P. 263–278.

65

Íàëîãîâûé êîäåêñ ÑØÀ íå ïðåäïîëàãàåò íèêàêèõ íàëîãîâ íà ïåðâûå ïîëìèëëèîíà êàïèòàëà, ïîëó÷åííûå çà ñ÷åò îïåðàöèé ñ îñíîâíîé ðåçèäåíöèåé ôèçè÷åñêîãî ëèöà. Òàêèì îáðàçîì, åñëè âû êóïèëè ñåáå íîâóþ æèëóþ íåäâèæèìîñòü çà ìèëëèîí äîëëàðîâ è ïðîäàëè çàòåì çà ïîëòîðà èëè ìåíüøå, íèêàêèå íàëîãè âû ïëàòèòü íå äîëæíû. Ñ äðóãîé ñòîðîíû, åñëè âû ïðîäàëè ýòî æèëüå çà 1,6 ìèëëèîíà äîëëàðîâ, òî âàøà ïðèáûëü ïîäëåæèò íàëîãîîáëîæåíèþ, âåäü äîõîä â òàêîé ñèòóàöèè ñîñòàâèë 600 òûñÿ÷ äîëëàðîâ, è åñëè ïðèíÿòü ñòàâêó íàëîãà ðàâíîé 25 ïðîöåíòàì, òî âû äîëæíû ãîñóäàðñòâó 25 òûñÿ÷ äîëëàðîâ, òàê êàê âû íà 100 òûñÿ÷ ïðåâûñèëè íåîáëàãàåìûé íàëîãàìè ìàêñèìóì.

66

Pruitt D. G., Rubin J. Z. Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement. – New York: Random House, 1986.

67

Ben-Yoav O., Pruitt D. Resistance to yielding and the expectation of cooperative future interaction in negotiation // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 1984. – ¹ 20. – P. 323–353; Ben-Yoav O., Pruitt D. Accountability to constituents: A two-edged sword // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1984. – ¹ 34. – P. 282–295.

68

O’Connor K. M., Arnold J. A., Burris E. R. Negotiators’ bargaining histories and their effects on future negotiation performance // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2005. – ¹ 90(2). – P. 350.

69

Vallacher R. R., Wegner D. M. Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1989. – ¹ 57. – P. 660–671.

70

Tinsley C. H., O’Connor K. M., Sullivan B. A. Tough guys finish last: The perils of a distributive reputation // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2002. – ¹ 88. – P. 621–642.

71

O’Connor K. M., Arnold J. A. Distributive spirals: Negotiation impasses and the moderating effects of disputant self-efficacy // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2001. – ¹ 84. – P. 148–176.

72

O’Connor K. M., Arnold J. A., Burris E. R. Negotiators’ bargaining histories and their effects on future negotiation performance // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2005. – ¹ 90. – P. 350–362.

73

Halpern J. J. The effect of friendship on personal business transactions // Journal of Conflict Resolution. – 1994. – ¹ 38(4). – P. 647–664.

74

Êñòàòè, ýòîò ïàðàäîêñ ëåã â îñíîâó çíàìåíèòîé ñòàòüè Äæîðäæà Àêåðëîôà «Ðûíîê “ëèìîíîâ”: íåîïðåäåëåííîñòü êà÷åñòâà è ðûíî÷íûé ìåõàíèçì», êîòîðàÿ áûëà îïóáëèêîâàíà â 1970-õ ãîäàõ.

75

Morton T. L. Intimacy and reciprocity of exchange: A comparison of spouses and strangers // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1978. – ¹ 36. – P. 72–81.

76

Valley K. L., Neale M. A., Mannix E. A. Friends, lovers, colleagues, strangers: The effects of relationships on the process and outcome of dyadic negotiations // Research on negotiation in organizations. – 1995. – ¹ 5. – P. 65–94.

77

Thompson L. L., DeHarpport T. Negotiation in long term relationships. – Äîêëàä íà êîíôåðåíöèè Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé àññîöèàöèè ïî óðåãóëèðîâàíèþ êîíôëèêòíûõ ñèòóàöèé. – Âàíêóâåð (Êàíàäà), 1990.

78

Amanatullah E., Morris M., Curhan J. Negotiators who give too much: Unmitigated communion, relational anxieties, and economic costs in distributive and integrative bargaining // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2008. – ¹ 95. – P. 723–728; Curhan J., Neale M., Ross L., Rosencranz-Engelmann J. Relational accommodation in negotiation: Effects of egalitarianism and gender on economic efficiency and relational capital // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2008. – ¹ 107. – P. 192–205.

79

White J. B. The politeness paradox. Getting the Terms you want without sacrificing the relationships you need. – 2011.

80

Goffman E. The presentation of self in everyday life. – New York: Anchor Books, 1967.

81

Curhan J. R., Elfenbein H. A., Kilduff G. J. Getting off on the right foot: subjective value versus economic value in predicting longitudinal job outcomes from job offer negotiations // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2009. – ¹ 94(2). – P. 524.

82

Davis M. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1983. – ¹ 44. – P. 113–126.

83

Epley N., Caruso E., Bazerman M. When perspective taking increases taking: Reactive egoism in social interactions // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2006. – ¹ 91. – P. 872–889.

84

Epley N., Caruso E. M. Egocentric ethics // Social Justice Research. – 2004. – ¹ 17(2). – P. 171–187.

85

Galinsky A., Mussweiler T. First offers as anchors: The role of perspective taking and negotiator focus // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 81. – P. 657–669; Galinsky A. D., Ku G., Wang C. S. Perspective-taking and self-other overlap: Fostering social bonds and facilitating social coordination // Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. – 2005. – ¹ 8. – P. 109–124.

86

Galinsky A., Maddux W., Gilin D., White J. Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent // Psychological Science. – 2008. – ¹ 19. – P. 378–384.

87

Tversky A., Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice // Science. – 1981. – ¹ 40. – P. 453–463.

88

Ïðèìåð âçÿò èç êíèãè: Dixit A. K., Nalebuff B. J. Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life. – New York, London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1993.

89

Lerner M. J. The belief in a just world. – Springer US, 1980. – P. 9–30.

90

Lerner M. J., Miller D. T. Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead // Psychological bulletin. – 1978. – ¹ 85(5). – P. 1030.

91

20 àâãóñòà 2012 ãîäà Áàðàê Îáàìà ñäåëàë ñëåäóþùåå çàÿâëåíèå: «Ìû î÷åíü ÷åòêî äàëè ïîíÿòü ðåæèìó Àññàäà è äðóãèì ó÷àñòíèêàì êîíôëèêòà, ÷òî ïîñëåäíåé êàïëåé ñòàíåò èíôîðìàöèÿ î ïðèìåíåíèè èëè ïåðåìåùåíèè õèìè÷åñêîãî îðóæèÿ. Ýòî ïîëíîñòüþ èçìåíèò íàøó ïîçèöèþ è âûíóäèò ïåðåñìîòðåòü îòíîøåíèå ê ïðîèñõîäÿùåìó». Èç çàÿâëåíèÿ æóðíàëèñòàì â Áåëîì äîìå.

92

Sinaceur M., Neale M. A. Not all threats are created equal: How implicitness and timing affect the effectiveness of threats in negotiations // Group Decision and Negotiation. – 2005. – ¹ 14(1). – P. 63–85.

93

Nierenberg, G. I. The art of negotiating: Psychological strategies for gaining advantageous bargains. – Barnes & Noble Publishing, 1995. – P. 46.

94

Gross J. Emotional regulation in adulthood: Timing is everything // Current Directions in Psychological Science. – 2001. – ¹ 10. – P. 214–219.

95

Gross J. Emotional regulation: Affective, cognitive and social consequences // Psychophysiology. – 2003. – ¹ 39. – P. 281–291.

96

Butler E. A., Egloff B., Wilhelm F. H., Smith N. C., Gross J. J. The social consequences of emotional regulation // Emotions. – 2003. – ¹ 3. – P. 48–67.

97

Zajonc R. B. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences // American psychologist. – 1980. – ¹ 35(2). – P. 151.

98

Strack F., Martin L. L., Stepper S. Inhibiting and Facilitating Conditions of the Human Smile: A Nonobtrusive Test of the Facial Feedback Hypothesis // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1998. – ¹ 54. – P. 768.

99

Isen A. M., Daubman K. A., Nowicki G. P. Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 1987. – ¹ 52(6). – P. 1122; Fredrickson B. L. The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions // American psychologist. – 2001. – ¹ 56(3). – P. 218; Loewenstein G. F., Thompson L., Bazerman M. H. Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts // Journal of Personality and Social psychology. – 1989. – ¹ 57(3). – P. 426; Pillutla M. M., Murnighan J. K. Unfairness, anger, and spite: Emotional rejections of ultimatum offers // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1996. – ¹ 68(3). – P. 208–224; Allred K. G., Mallozzi J. S., Matsui F., Raia C. P. The influence of anger and compassion on negotiation performance // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1997. – ¹ 70(3). – 175–187.

100

Bodenhausen G. V., Kramer G. P., Süsser K. Happiness and Stereotypic Thinking in Social Judgment // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1994. – ¹ 66(4). – P. 621. Ñì. òàêæå: Bless H., Clore G. L., Schwarz N., Golisano V., Rabe C., Wölk M. Mood and the Use of Scripts: Does a Happy Mood Really Lead to Mindlessness? // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1996. – ¹ 71(4). – P. 665.

101

Bodenhausen G. V., Sheppard L. A., Kramer G. P. Negative affect and social judgment: The differential impact of anger and sadness // European Journal of Social Psychology. – 1994. – ¹ 24(1). – P. 45–62.

102

Forgas J. P. Don’t worry, be sad! On the cognitive, motivational and interpersonal benefits of negative mood // Current Directions in Psychological Science. – 2013. – ¹ 22. – P. 225–232; Tiedens L. Z., Linton S. Judgment under emotional certainty and uncertainty: the effects of specific emotions on information processing // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 81(6). – P. 973.

103

Tiedens L. Z., Linton S. Judgment under emotional certainty and uncertainty: the effects of specific emotions on information processing // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 81(6). – P. 973.

104

Lerner J. S., Tiedens L. Z. Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognition // Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. – 2006. – ¹ 19(2). – P. 115–137.

105

Lerner J. S., Tiedens L. Z. Öèò. ñî÷.: Lerner J. S., Keltner D. Fear, anger, and risk // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 81(1). – P. 146; Shaver P., Schwartz J., Kirson D., O’connor C. Emotion knowledge: further exploration of a prototype approach // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 1987. – ¹ 52(6). – P. 1061.

106

Lerner J. S., Tiedens L. Z. Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognition // Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. – 2006. – ¹ 19(2). – P. 115–137.

107

Carnevale P. J., Isen A. M. The influence of positive affect and visual access on the discovery of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation // Organizational behavior and human decision processes. – 1986. – ¹ 37(1). – P. 1–13.

108

Anderson N. R., Neale M. A. All fired up but no one to blame // Working paper Stanford Psychology Department, Palo Alto, CA. – 2006.

109

Neale M. A., Wiltermuth S., Cargle C. Emotion and the uncertainty of negotiation // Working paper, Stanford Graduate School of Business. – 2009.

110

Öèò. ïî: Anderson N. R., Neale M. A.

111

Anderson N. R., Neale M. A. The role of emotions and uncertainty in negotiations // Working paper, Psychology Department, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA. – 2008.

112

Johnson E. J., Tversky A. Representations of perceptions of risks // Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. – 1984. – ¹ 113(1). – P. 55; Isen A. M., Means B. The influence of positive affect on decision-making strategy // Social cognition. – 1983. – ¹ 2(1). – P. 18–31.

113

Lerner J. S., Tiedens L. Z. Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognition // Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. – 2006. – ¹ 19(2). – P. 115–137.

114

Lerner J. S., Keltner D. Fear, anger, and risk // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2001. – 81(1). – P. 146.

115

Adler R. S., Rosen B., Silverstein E. M. Emotions in Negotiation: How to Manage Fear and Anger // Negotiation Journal. – 1998. – ¹ 14(2). – P. 161–179; Allred K. G. Anger and Retaliation: Toward an Understanding of Impassioned Conflict in Organizations // Research on Negotiation in Organizations. – 1999. – ¹ 7. – P. 27–58; Thompson L. L. The Truth about Negotiations. – Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, 2008.

116

Daly J. P. The effects of anger on negotiations over mergers and acquisitions // Negotiation Journal. – 1991. – ¹ 7(1). – P. 31–39.

117

Carnevale P. J. Positive affect and decision frame in negotiation // Group Decision and Negotiation. – 2008. – ¹ 17(1). – P. 51–63.

118

Barsade S. G. The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior // Administrative Science Quarterly. – 2002. – ¹ 47(4). – P. 644–675; Forgas J. P. On feeling good and getting your way: mood effects on negotiator cognition and bargaining strategies // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 1998. – ¹ 74(3). – P. 565; Lyubomirsky S., King L., Diener E. The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? // Psychological bulletin. – 2005. – ¹ 131(6). – P. 803.

119

Sinaceur M., Tiedens L. Z. Get mad and get more than even: The benefits of anger expressions in negotiations // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 2006. – ¹ 42. – P. 314–322.

120

Van Kleef G. A., De Dreu C. K. W., Manstead A. S. R. The interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2004. – ¹ 86. – P. 57–76.

121

Sinaceur M., Vasiljevic D., Neale M. Surprise Expression in Group Decisions: When an Emotional Expression Affects the Quality of Group Members’ Processing and Decision Accuracy. – Working paper, INSEAD, Fountainbleau, France, 2014.

122

Pugh S. D. Service with a smile: Emotional contagion in the service encounter // Academy of management journal – 2001. – ¹ 44(5). – P. 1018–1027; Kopelman S., Rosette A. S., Thompson L. The three faces of Eve: Strategic displays of positive, negative, and neutral emotions in negotiations // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2006. – ¹ 99(1). – P. 81–101.

123

Emerson R. M. Power-dependence relations // American sociological review. – 1962. – ¹ 27. – Ð. 31–41.

124

Keltner D., Gruenfeld D., Anderson C. Power, approach and inhibition // Psychological Review. – 2003. – ¹ 10. – P. 265–285.

125

Magee J. C., Galinsky A. D., Gruenfeld D. H. Power, propensity to negotiate, and moving first in competitive interactions // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. – 2007. – ¹ 33(2). – P. 200–212.

126

Woodward B. State of Denial. – New York: Simon and Schuster, 2006.

127

Gruenfeld D. H., Inesi M. E., Magee J. C., Galinsky A. D. Power and the objectification of social targets // Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2008. – ¹ 95(1). – P. 111.

128

Mannix E. A., Neale M. A. Power Imbalance and the Pattern of Exchange in Dyadic Negotiation // Group Decision and Negotiation. – 1993. – ¹ 2(2). – P. 119–133.

129

Galinsky A. D., Chou E., Halevy N., Van Kleef G. A. The Far Reaching Effects of Power: At the Individual, Dyadic, and Group Levels // Research on Managing Groups and Teams, vol. 15: Looking Back, Moving Forward / Margaret A. Neale, Elizabeth A. Mannix (Eds.). – Bringley, UK: Emerald Publishing, 2013. – P. 185–207.

130

Belmi P., Neale M. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all? Thinking that one is attractive increases the tendency to support inequality // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2014. – ¹ 124(2). – P. 133–149.

131

Carney D. R., Cuddy A. J., Yap A. J. Power posing brief nonverbal displays affect neuroendocrine levels and risk tolerance // Psychological Science. – 2010. – ¹ 21(10). – P. 1363–1368. Ñì. òàêæå âûñòóïëåíèå Ýìè Êàääè (Amy Cuddy) íà êîíôåðåíöèè TED: www.ted.com/talks/amy_cuddy_your_body_language_shapes_who_you_are.html.

132

Tiedens L. Z., Unzueta M. M., Young M. J. An unconscious desire for hierarchy? The motivated perception of dominance complementarity in task partners // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2007. – ¹ 93(3). – P. 402.

133

Kiesler D. J. The 1982 interpersonal circle: A taxonomy for complementarity in human transactions // Psychological Review. – 1983. – ¹ 90(3). – P. 185; Wiggins J. S. A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1979. – ¹ 37(3). – P. 395; Wiggins J. S. Circumplex models of interpersonal behavior in clinical psychology // Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology / P. S. Kendall, J. N. Butcher (Eds.). – New York: Wiley, 1982. – P. 183–221.

134

Carson R. C. Interaction Concepts of Personality. – Oxford, UK: Aldine, 1969; Horowitz L. M., Locke K. D., Morse M. B., Waikar S. V., Dryer D. Ñ, Tarnow E., Ghannam J. Self-Derogations and the Interpersonal Theory // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1991. – ¹ 61(1). – P. 68; Horowitz L. M., Wilson K. R., Turan B. Z. P., Constantino M. J., Henderson L. How Interpersonal Motives Clarify the Meaning of Interpersonal Behavior: A Revised Circumplex Model // Personality and Social Psychology Review. – 2006. – ¹ 10. – P. 67–86; Kiesler D. J. The 1982 Interpersonal Circle: A Taxonomy for Complementarity in Human Transactions // Psychological Review. – 1983. – ¹ 90(3). – P. 185.

135

Blumberg S. R., Hokanson J. E. The Effects of Another Person’s Response Style on Interpersonal Behavior in Depression // Journal of Abnormal Psychology. – 1983. – ¹ 92(2). – P. 196; Horowitz L. M., Wilson K. R., Turan B. Z. P., Constantino M. J., Henderson L. How Interpersonal Motives Clarify the Meaning of Interpersonal Behavior: A Revised Circumplex Model // Personality and Social Psychology Review. – 2006. – ¹ 10. – P. 67–86; Markey P. M., Funder D. C., Ozer D. J. Complementarity of Interpersonal Behaviors in Dyadic Interactions // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. – 2003. – ¹ 29(9). – P. 1082–1090.

136

Wiltermuth S. S., Tiedens L. Z., Neale M. A. The Benefits of Dominance Complementarity in Negotiations // Negotiations and Conflict Management Research. ( ïå÷àòè.)

137

Carroll J. S., Bazerman M. H., Maury R. Negotiator Cognitions: A Descriptive Approach to Negotiators’ Understanding of Their Opponents // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1988. – ¹ 41(3). – P. 352–370; Prietula M. J. Weingart L. R. Negotiation as Problem Solving // Advances in Managerial Cognition and Organizational Information Processing. – 1994. – ¹ 5. – P. 187–213.

138

Tiedens L. Z., Unzueta M. M., Young M. J. An Unconscious Desire for Hierarchy? The Motivated Perception of Dominance Complementarity in Task Partners // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2007. – ¹ 93(3). – P. 402.

139

Levitt S. D. Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors That Explain the Decline and Six That Do Not // Journal of Economic Perspectives. – 2004. – ¹ 18(1). – P. 163–190.

140

Hall J. A., Coats E. J., LeBeau L. S. Nonverbal Behavior and the Vertical Dimension of Social Relations: A Meta-Analysis // Psychological Bulletin. – 2005. – ¹ 131(6). – P. 898.

141

Ïîäðîáíåå ñì.: Chartrand T. L., Maddux W. W., Lakin J. L. Beyond the Perception-Behavior Link: The Ubiquitous Utility and Motivational Moderators of Nonconscious Mimicry // The New Unconscious / R. R. Hassin, J. S. Uleman, J. A. Bargh (Eds). – New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. – P. 334–361.

142

Bernieri F. J. Coordinated Movement and Rapport in Teacher-Student Interactions // Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. – 1988. – ¹ 12(2). – P. 120–138; ñì. òàêæå: LaFrance M. Nonverbal Synchrony and Rapport: Analysis by the Cross-Lag Panel Technique // Social Psychology Quarterly. – 1979. – ¹ 42. – P. 66–70; LaFrance M. Posture Mirroring and Rapport // Interaction Rhythms: Periodicity in Communicative Behavior / M. Davis (Ed.). – New York: Human Sciences Press, 1982. – P. 279–298.

143

Van Baaren R. B., Holland R. W., Steenaert B., Van Knippenberg A. Mimicry for Money: Behavioral Consequences of Imitation // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 2003. – ¹ 39(4). – P. 393–398.

144

Van Baaren R. B., Holland R. W., Steenaert B., Van Knippenberg A. Mimicry for Money: Behavioral Consequences of Imitation // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 2003. – ¹ 39(4). – P. 393–398.

145

Lakin J. L., Chartrand T. L. Using Nonconscious Behavioral Mimicry to Create Affiliation and Rapport // Psychological Science. – 2003. – ¹ 14(4). – P. 334–339; Van Baaren R. B., Maddux W. W., Chartrand T. L., De Bouter C., Van Knippenberg A. It Takes Two to Mimic: Behavioral Consequences of Self-Construals // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2003. – ¹ 84(5). – P. 1093; Chartrand T. L., Bargh J. A. The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1999. – ¹ 76(6), – P. 893; Cheng C. M., Chartrand T. L. Self-Monitoring without Awareness: Using Mimicry as a Nonconscious Affiliation Strategy // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2003. – ¹ 85(6). – P. 1170.

146

Yee N., Bailenson J. N., Urbanek M., Chang F., Merget D. The Unbearable Likeness of Being Digital: The Persistence of Nonverbal Social Norms in Online Virtual Environments // CyberPsychology and Behavior. – 2007. – ¹ 10(1). – P. 115–121; Blascovich J., Loomis J., Beall A. C., Swinth K. R., Hoyt C. L., Bailenson J. N. Immersive Virtual Environment Technology as a Methodological Tool for Social Psychology // Psychological Inquiry. – 2002. – ¹ 13(2). – P. 103–124.

147

Maddux W., Mullen E., Galinksy A. Chameleons Bake Bigger Pies and Take Bigger Pieces: Strategic Behavioral Mimicry Facilitates Negotiation Outcomes // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 2008. – ¹ 44. – P. 461–468.

148

Wiltermuth S. S., Neale M. A. Master of the Universe versus the Chameleon: Comparing the Effects of Complementarity and Mimicry in Negotiation Behavior. – Working paper, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, CA, 2008.

149

Chartrand T. L., Maddux W. W., Lakin J. L. Beyond the Perception-Behavior Link: The Ubiquitous Utility and Motivational Moderators of Nonconscious Mimicry // Unintended Thought 2: The New Unconscious / R. Hassin, J. Uleman, J. A. Bargh (Eds.). – New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. – P. 334–361.

150

LaFrance M. Nonverbal Synchrony and Rapport: Analysis by the Cross-Lag Panel Technique // Social Psychology Quarterly. – 1979. – ¹ 42. – P. 66–70.

151

Öèò. ïî: Maddux W., Mullen E., Galinksy A.

152

Lerner J. S. Tiedens L. Z. Portrait of the Angry Decision Maker: How Appraisal Tendencies Shape Anger’s Influence on Cognition // Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. – 2006. – ¹ 19(2). – P. 115–137; Frijda N. H., Kuipers P., Ter Schure E. Relations among Emotion, Appraisal, and Emotional Action Readiness // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1989. – ¹ 57(2). – P. 212.

153

Ïîäðîáíåå ñì.: Harmon-Jones Eddie. Clarifying the Emotive Functions of Asymmetrical Frontal Cortical Activity // Psychophysiology. – 2003. – ¹ 40(6). – P. 838–848; Harmon-Jones E., Segilman J. State Anger and Prefrontal Brain Activity: Evidence That Insult-Related Relative Left-Prefrontal Activation Is Associated with Experienced Anger and Aggression // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 80. – P. 797–803.

154

Lerner J. S., Keltner D. Beyond Valence: Toward a Model of Emotion-Specific Influences on Judgment and Choice // Cognition and Emotion. – 2000. – ¹ 14(4). – P. 473–493.

155

Lerner J. S., Keltner D. Fear, Anger, and Risk // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 81(1). – P. 146.

156

Bodenhausen G. V., Sheppard L. A., Kramer G. P. Negative Affect and Social Judgment: The Differential Impact of Anger and Sadness // European Journal of Social Psychology. – 1994. – 24(1). – P. 45–62; Lerner J. S., Goldberg J. H., Tetlock P. E. Sober Second Thought: The Effects of Accountability, Anger, and Authoritarianism on Attributions of Responsibility // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. – 1998. – ¹ 24(6). – P. 563–574; Small D. A., Lerner J. S. Emotional Politics: Personal Sadness and Anger Shape Public Welfare Preferences». – Paper presented at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, 2005; Tiedens L. Z. Anger and Advancement versus Sadness and Subjugation: The Effect of Negative Emotion Expressions on Social Status Conferral // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 80(1). – P. 86; Tiedens L. Z., Linton S. Judgment under Emotional Certainty and Uncertainty: The Effects of Specific Emotions on Information Processing // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2001. – ¹ 81(6). – P. 973.

157

Siegman A. W., Smith T. W. (Eds). Anger, Hostility, and the Heart. – London: Psychology Press, 2013.

158

Fragale A. R. The Power of Powerless Speech: The Effects of Speech Style and Task Interdependence on Status Conferral // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2006. – ¹ 101(2). – P. 243–261.

159

Brescoll V. L., Uhlmann E. L. Can an Angry Woman Get Ahead? Status Conferral, Gender, and Expression of Emotion in the Workplace // Psychological Science. – 2008. – ¹ 19(3). – P. 268–275.

160

Overbeck J. R., Neale M. A., Govan C. L. I Feel, Therefore You Act: Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Effects of Emotion on Negotiation as a Function of Social Power // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2010. – ¹ 112(2). – P. 126–139.

161

Sondak Harris, Neale Margaret A., Mannix Elizabeth A. Managing Uncertainty in Multiparty Negotiations // Handbook on Negotiation / W. Adair, M. Olekalns (Eds.). – North Hampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2013. – P. 283–310.

162

Wildschut T., Pinter B., Vevea J. L., Insko C. A., Schopler J. Beyond the Group Mind: A Quantitative Review of the Interindividual Inter-group Discontinuity Effect // Psychological Bulletin. – 2003. – ¹ 129. – P. 698–722.

163

Ïîäðîáíåå ñì.: Mannix Elizabeth A., Neale Margaret A. What Differences Make a Difference? The Promise and Reality of Diverse Teams in Organizations // Psychological Science in the Public Interest. – 2005. – ¹ 6. – P. 31–55.

164

Turner J. C. The Analysis of Social Influence // Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory / J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, M. S. Wetherell (Eds.). – Oxford: Blackwell, 1987. – P. 68–88; Allen V. L., Wilder D. A. Group Categorization and Attribution of Belief Similarity // Small Group Behavior. – 1979. – ¹ 10. – P. 73–80.

165

Janis I. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. – New York: Houghton-Mifflin, 1982.

166

Phillips K. W., Northcraft G., Neale M. Surface-Level Diversity and Information Sharing: When Does Deep-Level Similarity Help? // Group Processes and Intergroup Relations. – 2006. – ¹ 9. – P. 467–482.

167

Phillips K. W. The Effects of Categorically Based Expectations on Minority Influence: The Importance of Congruence // Society for Personality and Social Psychology. – 2003. – ¹ 29. – P. 3–13; Phillips K. W., Loyd D. L. When Surface and Deep Level Diversity Meet: The Effects of Dissenting Group Members // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2006. – ¹ 99. – P. 143–160.

168

Phillips K. Y., Apfelbaum E. Delusions of Homogeneity: Reinterpreting the Effects of Group Diversity // Research on Managing Groups and Teams, vol. 16: Looking Back, Moving Forward / M. A. Neale, E. A. Mannix (Eds.). – Bringley, UK: Emerald, 2012. – P. 185–207.

169

Phillips K. W., Loyd D. L. When Surface and Deep Level Diversity Meet: The Effects of Dissenting Group Members // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2006. – ¹ 99. – P. 143–160.

170

Loyd D. L., Wang C. S., Phillips K. W., Lount R. L. Social Category Diversity Promotes Pre-Meeting Elaboration: The Role of Relationship Focus // Organization Science. ( ïå÷àòè.)

171

Cao J., Phillips K. W. Team Diversity and Information Acquisition: How Homogeneous Teams Set Themselves Up to Have Less Conflict. – Working paper, Columbia Business School, 2013.

172

Halevey N. Team Negotiation: Social, Epistemic, Economic, and Psychological Consequences of Subgroup Conflict // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. – 2008. – ¹ 34. – P. 1687–1702.

173

Borenstein G. Intergroup Conflict: Individual, Group, and Collective Interests // Personality and Social Psychology Review. – 2003. – ¹ 7. – P. 129–145.

174

Brewer M. B. In-Group Bias in the Minimal Intergroup Situation: A Cognitive-Motivational Analysis // Psychological Bulletin. – 1979. – ¹ 86. – P. 307–324.

175

Tajifel H. R., Billig R., Bundy Ñ., Flament Ñ. Social Categorization and Intergroup Behavior // European Journal of Social Psychology. – 1971. – ¹ 1. – P. 49–178; Turner J. C. The Experimental Social Psychology of Intergroup Behavior // Intergroup Behavior / J. C. Turner, H. Giles (Eds.). – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981. – P. 66–101.

176

Kramer R. M. Intergroup Relations and Organizational Dilemmas: The Role of the Categorization Process // Research in Organizational Behavior. – 1991. – ¹ 13. – P. 191–228.

177

Wildschut T., Pinter B., Vevea J. L., Insko Ñ A., Schopler J. Beyond the Group Mind: A Quantitative Review of the Interindividual Intergroup Discontinuity Effect // Psychological Bulletin. – 2003. – ¹ 129. – P. 698–722; Pinter B., Insko Ñ. A., Wildschut T., Kirchner J. L., Montoya R. M., Wolf S. T. Reduction of Interindividual-Intergroup Discontinuity: The Role of Leader Accountability and Proneness to Guilt // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2007. – ¹ 93. – P. 250–265.

178

Galinsky A. D., Seiden V. L., Kim P. H., Medvec V. H. The Dissatisfaction of Having Your First Offer Accepted: The Role of Counterfactual Thinking in Negotiations // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. – 2002. – ¹ 28(2). – P. 271–283.

179

Page S. The Difference. – Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007; Mannix E. A., Neale M. A. What Differences Make a Difference? The Promise and Reality of Diverse Teams in Organizations // Psychological Science in the Public Interest. – 2005. – ¹ 6. – P. 31–55.

180

Polzer J. P. Intergroup Negotiations: The Effect of Negotiating Teams // Journal of Conflict Resolution. – 1996. – ¹ 40. – P. 678–698.

181

Walton R., McKersie R. A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations. – New York: McGraw Hill, 1964.

182

Stout R., Cannon-Bowers J., Salas E., Milanovich D. Planning, Shared Mental Models, and Coordinated Performance: An Empirical Link Is Established // Human Factors. – 1999. – ¹ 41. – P. 61–71.

183

Behfar K. J., Peterson R. S., Mannix E. A., Trochim W. M. The Critical Role of Conflict Resolution in Teams: A Close Look at the Links between Conflict Type, Conflict Management Strategies, and Team Outcomes // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2008. – ¹ 93(1). – P. 170; Brett J. M., Friedman R., Behfar K. How to Manage Your Negotiating Team // Harvard Business Review. – 2009. – ¹ 87(9). – P. 105–109.

184

Murnighan J. K. Organizational Coalitions: Structural Contingencies and the Formation Process // Research on Negotiation in Organizations. – 1986. – ¹ 1. – P. 155–173; Polzer J. T., Mannix E. A., Neale M. A. Interest Alignment and Coalitions in Multiparty Negotiation // Academy of Management Journal. – 1998. – ¹ 41. – P. 42–54.

185

Murnighan J. K., Brass D. Intraorganizational Coalitions // Research in Negotiating in Organizations / R. Lewicki, B. Sheppard, M. Bazerman (Eds.). – Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1991. – P. 283–306.

186

Watkins M., Rosegrant S. Sources of Power in Coalition Building // Negotiation Journal. – 1996. – ¹ 12. – P. 47–68.

187

Polzer J. T., Mannix E. A., Neale M. A. Interest Alignment and Coalitions in Multiparty Negotiation // Academy of Management Journal. – 1998. – ¹ 41. – P. 42–54.

188

Murnighan J. K., Brass D. Intraorganizational Coalitions // Research in Negotiating in Organizations / R. Lewicki, B. Sheppard, M. Bazerman (Eds.). – Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1991. – P. 283–306.

189

Âî II âåêå äî íàøåé ýðû Ìàðê Ïîðöèé Êàòîí Ñòàðøèé â ñâîåì òðàêòàòå «Î çåìëåäåëèè» (De Agri Cultura, 2:7) ðåêîìåíäóåò àóêöèîíû äëÿ ïðîäàæè óðîæàÿ è ñåëüõîçèíâåíòàðÿ, à â äðóãîì ñâîåì òðóäå (Orationum Reliquae, 53:303, Tusculum) – àóêöèîíû äëÿ äîìàøíåé óòâàðè. Ïëóòàðõ â «Ñðàâíèòåëüíûõ æèçíåîïèñàíèÿõ» (Vitae Parallelae, Poplikos 9:10) óïîìèíàåò àóêöèîíû, ïðîâîäèâøèåñÿ â VI âåêå äî íàøåé ýðû, íà êîòîðûõ ïðîäàâàëèñü âîåííîïëåííûå.

190

Bulow J., Klemperer P. Auctions vs. Negotiations. – NBER Working Paper ¹ w4608, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1994.

191

Malmendier U., Lee Y. H. The Bidder’s Curse // American Economic Review. – 2011. – ¹ 101(2). – P. 749–787.

192

Ku G., Malhotra D., Murnighan J. K. Towards a Competitive Arousal Model of Decision-Making: A Study of Auction Fever in Live and Internet Auctions // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2005. – ¹ 96(2). – P. 89–103.

193

Malhotra D., Ku G., Murnighan J. K. When Winning Is Every Thing // Harvard Business Review. – 2008. – ¹ 86(5). – P. 78.

194

Ku G., Malhotra D., Murnighan J. K. Towards a Competitive Arousal Model of Decision-Making: A Study of Auction Fever in Live and Internet Auctions // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2005. – ¹ 96(2). – P. 89–103.

195

Ordonez L., Benson III L. Decisions under Time Pressure: How Time Constraint Affects Risky Decision Making // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1997. – ¹ 71(2). – P. 121–140.

196

Zajonc R. B. Social Facilitation. – Ann Arbor, MI: Research Center for Group Dynamics, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1965; Markus H. R. The Effect of Mere Presence on Social Facilitation: An Unobtrusive Task // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 1978. – ¹ 14. – P. 389–397.

197

Rogo Rafael. Strategic Information and Selling Mechanism. – PhD diss., Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, 2009.

198

Guinness World Records 2013 / C. Glenday (Ed.). – New York: Random House LLC, 2013.

199

Malmendier U., Moretti E., Peters F. S. Winning by Losing: Evidence on the Long-Run Effects of Mergers. – NBER Working Paper ¹ w18024, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2012.

200

Ku G., Galinsky A. D., Murnighan J. K. Starting Low but Ending High: A Reversal of the Anchoring Effect in Auctions // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2006. – ¹ 90(6). – P. 975.

201

Simonsohn R., Ariely D. When Rational Sellers Face Non-Rational Consumers: Evidence from Herding on eBay. – Working paper, Fuqua School of Management, Duke University, 2007.

202

Curhan J. R., Elfenbein H. A., Kilduff G. J. Getting Off on the Right Foot: Subjective Value Versus Economic Value in Predicting Longitudinal Job Outcomes from Job Offer Negotiations // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2009. – ¹ 94(2). – P. 524–534.

203

Drolet A. L., Morris M. W. Rapport in Conflict Resolution: Accounting for How Face-to-Face Contact Fosters Mutual Cooperation in Mixed-Motive Conflicts // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. – 2000. – ¹ 36(1). – P. 26–50.

204

Curhan J. R., Elfenbein H. A., Xu H. What Do People Value When They Negotiate? Mapping the Domain of Subjective Value in Negotiation //Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 2006. – ¹ 91. – P. 493.

205

Tinsley Ñ. H., O’Connor K. M., Sullivan B. A. Tough Guys Finish Last: The Perils of a Distributive Relationship // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2002. – ¹ 88. – P. 621.

206

Curhan J. R., Elfenbein H. A., Kilduff G. J. Getting Off on the Right Foot: Subjective Value versus Economic Value in Predicting Longitudinal Job Outcomes from Job Offer Negotiations // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2009. – ¹ 94(2). – P. 524–534.

207

Curhan J. R., Elfenbein H. A. What Do People Want When They Negotiate? // The Subjective Value Inventory, 2008. – URL: http://www.subjectivevalue.com.

208

O’Neil B. The Number of Outcomes in the Pareto-Optimal Set of Discrete Bargaining Games // Mathematics of Operations Research. – 1981. – ¹ 6. – P. 571.

209

Raiffa H. Post-Settlement Settlements // Negotiation Journal. – 1985. – ¹ 1. – P. 9.

210

Frederick S., Loewenstein G., O’Donoghue T. Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review // Journal of Economic Literature. – 2002. – ¹ 40. – P. 351–401; Time and Decision: Economic and Psychological Perspectives of Intertemporal Choice / G. Loewenstein, D. Read, and R. F. Baumeister (Eds.). – New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2003; Movious H., Wilson T. How We Feel about the Deal // Negotiation Journal. – 2011. – April. – P. 241–250.

211

Kahenman D. Reference Points, Anchors, Norms, and Mixed Feelings // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 1992. – ¹ 51. – P. 296–312.

212

Novemsky N., Schweitzer M. What Makes Negotiators Happy? The Differential Effects of Internal and External Social Comparisons on Negotiator Satisfaction // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. – 2004. – ¹ 95. – P. 186–197.

Âåðíóòüñÿ ê ïðîñìîòðó êíèãè Âåðíóòüñÿ ê ïðîñìîòðó êíèãè