The current research explored whether two related yet distinct social competencies -- perspective taking (the cognitive capacity to consider the world from another individual's viewpoint) and empathy (the ability to connect emotionally with another individual) -- have differential effects in negotiations. Across three studies, using both individual difference measures and experimental manipulations, we found that perspective taking increased individuals' ability to discover hidden agreements and to both create and claim resources at the bargaining table. However, empathy did not prove nearly as advantageous and at times was detrimental to discovering a possible deal and achieving individual profit. These results held regardless of whether the interaction was a negotiation in which a prima facie solution was not possible or a multiple-issue negotiation that required discovering mutually beneficial trade-offs. Although empathy is an essential tool in many aspects of social life, perspective taking appears to be a particularly critical ability in negotiations.

No abstract

No abstract

Social comparisons may seem to serve several positive functions, including self-enhancement. Frequent social comparisons, however, have a dark side. Two studies examined the relationship between frequent social comparisons and destructive emotions and behaviors. In Study 1, people who said they made frequent social comparisons were more likely to experience envy, guilt, regret, and defensiveness, and to lie, blame others, and to have unmet cravings. In Study 2, police officers who said they made frequent social comparisons were more likely to show ingroup bias and to be less satisfied with their jobs. The dark side of frequent social comparisons was not associated with self-esteem. Results are discussed in terms of the role of individual differences in social comparison processes.

Despite gains in women's status, successful leaders are more likely to be men than women. The styles that successful leaders set tend to be masculine. Female leaders face a paradox: If they emulate a masculine leadership style, their male subordinates will dislike them. If they adopt a stereotypically warm and nurturing feminine style, they will be liked, but not respected. Two experiments found that female leaders who are mindful can escape this paradox. In an experiment, college-aged men perceived a woman who was masculine and mindful to be a better leader than a woman who was masculine and mindless. A second experiment replicated that result with middle-aged businessmen.Over the past 2 decades, the number of women pursuing managerial careers in the United States has risen dramatically. Women in management have proven to be equally skilled, educated, and trained as their male peers, and organizations are hiring managerial men and women in roughly equal numbers. Despite their comparable qualifications, however, female managers are not entering the highest leadership positions at the same rate as their male counterparts (Burke & MacDermid, 1996). At the start of the 1990s, only five of the Fortune 500 industrial and service