Short Research Note
The more (complex), the better? The influence of epistemic motivation on integrative bargaining in complex negotiation
Article first published online: 7 APR 2009
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
European Journal of Social Psychology
Volume 40, Issue 2, pages 355–365, March 2010
How to Cite
van der Schalk, J., Beersma, B., van Kleef, G. A. and De Dreu, C. K.W. (2010), The more (complex), the better? The influence of epistemic motivation on integrative bargaining in complex negotiation. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 40: 355–365. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.633
- Issue published online: 12 FEB 2010
- Article first published online: 7 APR 2009
- Manuscript Accepted: 24 FEB 2009
- Manuscript Received: 19 DEC 2007
- Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Grant Number: 451.04.100
- Gerben van Kleef. Grant Number: 451-05-010
- Carsten de Dreu. Grant Number: 410.21.01P
Negotiating about a larger number of issues is often argued to enhance the potential for integrative bargaining. However, the enhanced complexity may also make negotiators more susceptible to bias, making it less likely for them to reach win–win agreements. We argue that epistemic motivation, the motivation to hold accurate perceptions of the world, provides a key to solve this paradox. In a negotiation experiment we manipulated complexity by having participants negotiate about 6 or 18 issues and we manipulated epistemic motivation by making participants process-accountable or not. Under low complexity, there was no effect of epistemic motivation on created value. Under high complexity, however, negotiators with high epistemic motivation created more value than negotiators with low epistemic motivation. Thus, negotiating about larger numbers of issues was only beneficial for negotiators if they were motivated to think deeply and thoroughly. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.