↓ Skip to main content

Using Self-regulation to Successfully Overcome the Negotiation Disadvantage of Low Power

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using Self-regulation to Successfully Overcome the Negotiation Disadvantage of Low Power
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00271
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andreas Jäger, David D. Loschelder, Malte Friese

Abstract

A plethora of studies has demonstrated that low-power negotiators attain lower outcomes compared to high-power negotiators. We argue that this low-power disadvantage can be conceptualized as impaired goal attainment and that self-regulation can help to overcome it. Three experiments tested this assertion. In Study 1, low-power negotiators attained lower profits compared to their high-power opponents in a face-to-face negotiation. Negotiators who set themselves goals and those who additionally formed if-then plans prior to the negotiation overcame the low-power disadvantage. Studies 2 and 3 replicated these effects in computer-mediated negotiations: Low-power negotiators conceded more than high-power negotiators. Again, setting goals and forming additional if-then plans helped to counter the power disadvantage. Process analyses revealed that negotiators' concession-making at the start of the negotiation mediated both the low-power disadvantage and the beneficial effects of self-regulation. The present findings show how the low-power disadvantage unfolds in negotiations and how self-regulatory techniques can help to overcome it.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 23%
Student > Master 4 15%
Other 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Lecturer 2 8%
Other 6 23%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 27%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Mathematics 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 6 23%
Unknown 3 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,048,170
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,117
of 30,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,277
of 307,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#75
of 545 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,934 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 545 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.