Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Vanderbilt University Law School

Series

2004

Negotiation

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Principles Of Influence In Negotiation, Chris Guthrie Jan 2004

Principles Of Influence In Negotiation, Chris Guthrie

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Negotiation is often viewed as an alternative to adjudication. In fact, however, negotiation and adjudication may be more alike than different because each is a process of persuasion. Both in the courtroom and at the bargaining table, the lawyer's primary task is to persuade someone other than her own client that her client's positions, interests, and perspectives should be honored. Despite this apparent similarity, persuasion operates differently in adjudication and negotiation because the lawyer seeks to influence a different party in each process. In adjudication, the lawyer seeks primarily to persuade the judge or jury hearing the case. The judge …


The Impact Of The Impact Bias On Negotiation, Chris Guthrie, David Sally Jan 2004

The Impact Of The Impact Bias On Negotiation, Chris Guthrie, David Sally

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The theory of principled or problem-solving negotiation assumes that negotiators are able to identify their interests (or what they really want) in a negotiation. Recent research on effective forecasting calls this assumption into question. In this paper, which will appear in a forthcoming symposium issue of the Marquette Law Review devoted to the Emerging Interdisciplinary Canon of Negotiation, we explore the impact of this research on negotiation and lawyering.


Heuristics And Biases At The Bargaining Table, Chris Guthrie, Russell Korobkin Jan 2004

Heuristics And Biases At The Bargaining Table, Chris Guthrie, Russell Korobkin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In this essay, written for a symposium on The Emerging Interdisciplinary Cannon of Negotiation, we examine the role of heuristics in negotiation from two vantage points. First, we identify the way in which some common heuristics are likely to influence the negotiator's decision-making processes. Namely, we discuss anchoring and adjustment, availability, self-serving evaluations, framing, the status quo bias, contrast effects, and reactive devaluation. Understanding these common heuristics and how they can cause negotiators' judgments and choices to deviate from the normative model can enable negotiators to reorient their behavior so it more closely aligns with the normative model or, alternatively, …