This Article Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Tyler, T. R. Articles by Lind, E. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Two Psychologies of Conflict Resolution: Differing Antecedents of Pre-Experience Choices and Post-Experience Evaluations

New York University, tyler{at}psych.nyu.edu

Yuen J. Huo

University of California, Los Angeles

E. Allan Lind

Duke University

The literature on the `myth of self-interest' model of perceived human motivation suggests that people believe that both they and others are more motivated by self-interest than is actually the case. Four studies are reported which test one implication of the myth of self-interest: the psychology of pre-experience preferences and post-experience evaluations will differ. We hypothesize that people arrive at pre-experience preferences for decision-making procedures based upon the belief that they want to maximize their self-interest. Further, they will define their self-interest in material terms. Consequently, they choose procedures that they believe promise them the best material outcomes. However, post-experience evaluations are based upon a different factor - the quality of the treatment received during the course of the procedure. The results of all four studies support the suggestion that the psychology of preference and of evaluation differ as predicted. The findings suggest that preference and choice should be viewed as reflecting different psychological processes.

Key Words: choice • satisfaction • self-interest • the • relational • model

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Stahl, R. Vermunt, and N. Ellemers Reactions to Outgroup Authorities' Decisions: The Role of Expected Bias, Procedural Fairness and Outcome Favorability Group Processes Intergroup Relations, July 1, 2008; 11(3): 281 - 299. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. van Beest, R. B. Andeweg, L. Koning, and P. A. M. van Lange Do Groups Exclude Others More Readily Than Individuals in Coalition Formation? Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2008; 11(1): 55 - 67. [Abstract] [PDF]