Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rubin, J. Z.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson-George, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rubin, J. Z.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson-George, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 6, No. 2, 216-221 (1980)
DOI: 10.1177/014616728062005

Weakness as Strength

Test of a "My Hands are Tied" Ploy in Bargaining

Jeffrey Z. Rubin

Tufts University

Joel Brockner

Tufts University

John Eckenrode

Tufts University

Margaret A. Enright

Tufts University

Cynthia Johnson-George

Tufts University

It has been argued that bargainers may be able to extract concessions from one another by coupling an intransigent bargaining stance with the justification that one's hands have been tied by one's constituent. Intransigence justified by weakness (one's constituent's commitment to an inflexible position) was predicted to prove more effective in eliciting concessions than the same intransigence coupled with no such justification. Subjects were run in a variant of the Bilateral Monopoly paradigm played with three simulated others. Unexpectedly, the participants made fewer concessions when the opponent attributed his intransigence to his constituent's behavior. Several limiting conditions for the effective implementation of a "my hands are tied" ploy were discussed.


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
S. B. Sitkin and R. J. Bies
Social Accounts in Conflict Situations: Using Explanations to Manage Conflict
Human Relations, March 1, 1993; 46(3): 349 - 370.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
R. J. BIES, D. L. SHAPIRO, and L. L. CUMMINGS
Causal Accounts and Managing Organizational Conflict: Is It Enough to Say It's Not My Fault?
Communication Research, August 1, 1988; 15(4): 381 - 399.
[Abstract]