Entrepreneurship & Innovation

In this article, the authors explore the role of individuals' counterfactual thoughts in determining their satisfaction with negotiated outcomes. When negotiators' first offers are immediately accepted, negotiators are more likely to generate counterfactual thoughts about how they could have done better and therefore are less likely to be satisfied with the agreement than are negotiators whose offers are not accepted immediately.

Verhandlungen spielen eine entscheidende Rolle in all jenen Lebensbereichen, die durch Interessenskonflikte gegenzeichnet sind. In Verhandlungssituationen sind relevante Informationen typischer Weise in unzureichendem Maße vorhanden, so dass Verhandlungen meist unter Unsicherheit geführt werden. Folglich sollten Prozesse der Verhandlungsführung von denjenigen psychologischen Mechanismen bestimmt sein, die gemeinhin menschliches Urteilen und Entscheiden unter Unsicherheit charakterisieren.

A full understanding of organizational and group effectiveness must take into account the causes and contexts that exacerbate and reduce tension between groups, and the individual psychological mechanisms involved. This chapter attempts to analyze intergroup behavior through a phenomenological lens: examining how people perceive groups, their own and others, and how these perceptions shape subsequent behavior.

The authors examined how gender stereotypes affect negotiation performance. Men outperformed women when the negotiation was perceived as diagnostic of ability (Experiment 1) or the negotiation was linked to gender-specific traits (Experiment 2), suggesting the threat of negative stereotype confirmation hurt women's performance relative to men.

In this paper we review the literature on first offers in negotiations. We explore the determinants of who will make the first offer, how extreme that first offer will be, what effect the first offer has on the value of the final outcome, and how first offers influence post-negotiation evaluations. The PDF attached here may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. Copyright © 2001 by the American Psychological Association. Reproduced with permission.

We demonstrate that counterfactuals prime a mental simulation mind-set in which relevant but potentially converse alternatives are considered and that this mind-set activation has behavioral consequences. This mind-set is closely related to the simulation heuristic (Kahneman & Tversky, 1982). Participants primed with a counterfactual were more likely to solve the Duncker candle problem (Experiment 1), suggesting that they noticed an alternative function for one of the objects, an awareness that is critical to solving the problem.

In this article, the authors focus on impacts of tax rates and, in particular, tax progressivity on the decision to become an 'entrepreneur.' While a proportional tax with a full loss offset will not affect the entry decision for a risk-neutral individual, a progressive schedule with imperfect loss offsets can discourage entry. The authors find substantial evidence for this effect on entrepreneurship using variation in tax schedules faced by households in the Panel Study on Income Dynamics (PSID) over the period from 1979 to 1992.

Previous theories of financial market rationing focussed on a single market, either the credit or the equity market. An interesting question is whether credit and equity rationing are mutually compatible, and how they interact. We consider a model with two-dimensional asymmetric information, where entrepreneurs have private information about both the expected returns and the risk of their projects. We show that credit and equity rationing may occur individually or simultaneously.

Using 3 experiments, the authors explored the role of perspective-taking in debiasing social thought. In the 1st 2 experiments, perspective-taking was contrasted with stereotype suppression as a possible strategy for achieving stereotype control. In Experiment 1, perspective-taking decreased stereotypic biases on both a conscious and a nonconscious task.