Coalition Formation: An Integrative Model

Lawler, Edward J.; join(, George A. Youngs

doi:10.2307/2786230

Cited by 32 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(38 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most social psychological theories of coalition formation attempt to account for the occurrence of coalitions according to the resources that individuals control (for some exceptions see Lawler & Youngs, 1975;Mazur, 1968;Taylor, 1970). One of the reasons for the supposed importance of resources is that they affect the proportion of the payoff an individual expects to obtain, or is able to obtain, in various coalitions (Gamson, 1961b;Komorita & Chertkoff, 1973).…”

Section: Relationship Of Present Research To Previous Coalition Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coalition formation in triads with single-peaked payoff curves

Miller¹

1979

Syst. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coalition formation in decision making of three-person group systems was studied using a coalition game. This was devised as an analogue for many situations in which groups make decisions, both in "real life" and in laboratory experiments. One of the important findings of the study was that in this game, unlike the games usually employed in coalition research, the "resources" that the triad members possessed had relatively little effect upon which members tended to enter into a coalition or upon which of the partners to a coalition tended to receive the larger payoff. Instead, the formation of coalitions tended to depend upon whether the payoff structure of the game made it possible for the partners in a particular coalition to reach an agreement giving both of them relatively large payoffs. The findings are discussed in relation to previous research on coalitions.

show abstract

Section: Relationship Of Present Research To Previous Coalition Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coalition formation in triads with single-peaked payoff curves

Miller¹

1979

Syst. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These efforts notwithstanding, it was not until Vinacke and Arkoff (1957) simplified the theory even further that the theory was adopted in social psychology (Chertkoff, 1970;Tedeschi, Schlenker, & Bonoma, 1973), and political science (Riker, 1962). Such adoptions have generally been directed towards reformulating the logic imposed by game theory, and also relaxing its assumptions in an attempt to increase its applicability (Komorita, 1979;Lawler & Youngs, 1975;Miller, 1979). However, the basic constraints imposed by game theory have severely restricted the applicability of these attempts at predicting coalition formation in an organizational setting.…”

Section: Conflict In Organizational Buyingmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…These needs focus on the attitudes individuals have towards the aims and internal environment of a coalition and their need to behave in a manner consistent with those attitudes. Research by Lawler and Youngs (1975) has shown that ideological factors play an important role in coalition formation. Since a person's behavior is dependent on what that person wants to do, and since joining or forming a coalition involves adhering to group norms, ideological needs assume importance in coalition formation in the BC.…”

Section: Individual Needs Of Bc Membersmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In addition to research along the lines suggested by the theories, there has also been research conducted to determine independent factors that cause coalitions to form. Such factors include the availability of rewards (Folkes & Weiner, 1977;Komorita & Kravitz, 1981;Komorita & Tumonis, 1980;Lawler & Youngs, 1975;Rapoport & Kahan, 1976), and resource or power positions of the members of a decision group (Caplow, 1956;Chertkoff, 1971;Chertkoff & Braden, 1974;Gamson, 1961;Meese, Vallacher, & Phillips, 1975;Sherif, 1958).…”

Section: Theories Of Coalition Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conflict Management in Organizational Buying Behavior: The Role of Coalitions

Tadepalli

1992

International Journal of Conflict Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

show abstract

“…Lawler and Youngs ( 1975) did a questionnaire study which indicates that attitudinal differences among parties have a stronger influence on coalition behavior than several other variables, including power differences. Leiserson's ( 1970) own experimental study confirms the predictions of the minimal distance theory.…”

Section: Attitudinal Similarity Control and Coalition Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%