|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 2, No. 2,
99-118 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430299022001
© 1999 SAGE Publications
The Two Psychologies of Conflict Resolution: Differing Antecedents of Pre-Experience Choices and Post-Experience Evaluations
Tom R. Tyler
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
References
- Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1972). Social statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Brett, J. M. (1986). Commentary on procedural justice papers. In R. Lewicki, M. Bazerman, & B. Sheppard (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 81-90). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
- Brett, J. M., & Goldberg, S. (1983). Mediator-advisors: A new third-party role. In M. Bazerman & R. Lewicki (Eds.), Negotiating in organizations (pp. 165-176). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
- Dawes, R. M. (1988). Rational choice in an uncertain world. San Diego, CA: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
- Fischhoff, B. (1980). For those condemned to study the past. In R. A. Schwede & D. W. Fiske (Eds.), New directions for methodology of behavioral science (pp. 79-93). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Hensler, D. R., Marquis, M. S., Abrahamse, A. F., Berry, S. H., Ebener, P. A., Lewis, E. G., Lind, E. A., MacCoun, R. J., Manning, W. G., Rogowski, J. A., & Vaiana, M. E. (1991). Compensation for accidental injuries in the United States. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
- Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications. New York: Routledge.
- Houlden, P., LaTour, S., Walker, L., & Thibaut, J. (1978). Preferences for modes of dispute resolution as a function of process and decision control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 13-30.[CrossRef]
- Huo, Y. J., Smith, H.-J., Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1996). Super ordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns. Psychological Science, 7, 40-45.
- Kelley, H. H., & Stahelski, A. (1972). Social interaction basis of cooperators' and competitors' beliefs about others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 190-197.
- Kurtz, S. T., & Houlden, P. (1981). Determinants of procedural preferences of post court-martial military personnel. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 2, 27-43.
- Lind, E. A. (1997). Testimony on the `Alternative Dispute Resolution and Settlement Act' (H.R. 2603, 105th Congress, 1st Session). Testimony, House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property, 9 October.
- Lind, E. A. (in press). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational behavior. San Francisco, CA: New Lexington.
- Lind, E. A., Erickson, B. E., Friedland, N., & Dickenberger, M. (1978). Reactions to procedural models for adjudicative conflict resolution: A cross-national study. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 22, 318-242.
- Lind, E. A., Greenberg, J., Scott, K. S., & Welchans, T. D. (1998). The winding road from employee to complainant: Situational and psychological determinants of wrongful termination claims. Paper presented to the Academy of Management meetings, August, San Diego, CA.
- Lind, E. A., Huo, Y. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1994).... And justice for all: Ethnicity, gender, and preferences for dispute resolution procedures. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 269-290.
- Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & de Vera Park, M. V. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 224-251.[CrossRef]
- Lind, E. A., MacCoun, R. J., Ebener, P. A., Felstiner, W. L. F., Hensler, D. R., Resnik, J., & Tyler, T. R. (1990). In the eye of the beholder: Tort litigant's evaluations of their experiences in the civil justice system. Law and Society Review, 24, 953-996.[CrossRef]
- Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
- Lind, E. A., Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. (1997). Procedural context and culture: Variation in the antecedents of procedural justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 767-780.[CrossRef]
- MacCoun, R., Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1992). Alternative dispute resolution in trial and appellate courts. In D. Kagehiro & W. S. Laufer (Eds.), Handbook of law and psychology. New York: Springer-Verlag.
- Miller, D. T., & Ratner, R. K. (1996). The power of the myth of self-interest. In L. Montada & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Current societal concerns about justice. New York: Plenum.
- Miller, D. T., & Ratner, R. K. (1998). The disparity between the actual and assumed power of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 53-62.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Smith, H. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1997). Choosing the right pond: The influence of the status of one's group and one's status in that group on self-esteem and group-oriented behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 146-170.[CrossRef]
- Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
- Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Tyler, T. R. (1989a). The quality of dispute resolution processes and outcomes. Denver University Law Review, 66, 419-436.
- Tyler, T. R. (1989b). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830-838.[CrossRef][ISI]
- Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale.
- Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder, CO: Westview.
- Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 115-191.[ISI]
- Tyler, T. R., Lind, E. A., Ohbuchi, K., Sugawara, I., & Huo, Y. J. (1998). Conflict with outsiders: Disputing within and across cultural boundaries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 137-146.[Abstract]
- Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., & Spodick, N. (1985). The influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 72-81.[CrossRef][ISI]
 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]
|
|
|
|
