Culture and egocentric perceptions of fairness in conflict and negotiation.

Gelfand, Michele J.; Higgins, Marianne; Nishii, Lisa H.; Raver, Jana L.; Domínguez, A Emma; Murakami, Fumio; Yamaguchi, Susumu; Toyama, Midori

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.5.833

Cited by 139 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, cultural research in conflict and cooperation shows that persons from collectivistic as opposed to individualistic cultures tend to minimize differences between themselves and others (e.g., see themselves as closer to others in fairness; Gelfand et al, 2002). These findings are similar to those found at the individual level.…”

Section: Self-supervisor Disagreement and Other Orientationmentioning

confidence: 55%

The effect of other orientation on self–supervisor rating agreement

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryEmployees generally rate their performance more favorably than do their supervisors, which can lead to conflict and poor job performance. However, comparative international research indicates that persons from other-oriented collectivist cultures are less self-enhancing, suggesting that other-oriented employees will exhibit greater agreement with ratings provided by their supervisors. We examined the effect of subordinates' other orientation on self-supervisor performance rating agreement. Consistent with cultural expectations, self-ratings of other-oriented subordinates showed greater agreement with ratings provided by their supervisors and less leniency relative to their supervisors' evaluations. These findings have implications for understanding how employees in different professions, organizations, and cultures utilize feedback from their supervisors.

show abstract

Section: Self-supervisor Disagreement and Other Orientationmentioning

confidence: 55%

The effect of other orientation on self–supervisor rating agreement

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such perceptions are, nonetheless, culture-bound, at least to some degree. For example, egocentric biases in negotiation contexts-i.e., viewing one's own behavior and larger shares for oneself as fairer-were found to be more common in the U.S. than Japan (Gelfand et al, 2002). Thus, we expected that U.S. participants who scored high (vs. low) in terms of system justification would rate salary distributions favoring the self as fairer and more satisfying in comparison with Hungarian participants who scored high on system justification.…”

Section: Perceptions Of Fairness In the Workplacementioning

confidence: 89%

System Justification, Satisfaction, and Perceptions of Fairness and Typicality at Work: A Cross-System Comparison Involving the U.S. and Hungary

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research addresses system justification tendencies in the United States and Hungary and their potential to shape reactions to equity-equality tradeoffs in the workplace. Participants in both nations were asked to rate the fairness of, their satisfaction with, and the typicality of four hypothetical work situations. These scenarios differed in terms of which distributive justice principle was violated (equity or equality) and whether the violation favored the participant or the co-worker (self or other). While the mean level of system justification was lower in Hungary than in the U.S., multilevel models revealed that in both societal contexts the motivation to justify the system was associated with participants' perceptions of justice in the workplace. Based on the characteristics of the two social systems, however, these tendencies played out differently. Specifically, for the U.S. participants system justification was associated with more favorable views of work situations that emphasized equity over equality and that rewarded the self over others, whereas for Hungarian participants system justification was associated with more favorable views of work situations that emphasized equality over equity and Portions of this research were presented at the Academy

show abstract

“…There is a large body of work in the psychological and social sciences that investigate behavior among human decision-makers from different cultures [De Dreu and Van Lange 1995;Kashima et al 2005;Gelfand et al 2002] (inter alia), ranging back to the classic studies of Hofstede [1980] on the dimensions characterizing crosscultural differences among people. Most of the psychological studies on negotiation across cultures have been comparative, in the sense that it points to differences in people's negotiation behavior that are motivated by cultural factors, such as individualism and collectivism [Gelfand and Realo 1999].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Adaptive Agent for Negotiating with People in Different Cultures

Gal

Kraus

Gelfand

et al. 2011

ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid dissemination of technology such as the Internet across geographical and ethnic lines is opening up opportunities for computer agents to negotiate with people of diverse cultural and organizational affiliations. To negotiate proficiently with people in different cultures, agents need to be able to adapt to the way behavioral traits of other participants change over time. This paper describes a new agent for repeated bilateral negotiation that was designed to model and adapt its behavior to the individual traits exhibited by its negotiation partner. The agent's decisionmaking model combined a social utility function that represented the behavioral traits of the other participant, as well as a rule-based mechanism that used the utility function to make decisions in the negotiation process. The agent was deployed in a strategic setting in which both participants needed to complete their individual tasks by reaching agreements and exchanging resources, the number of negotiation rounds were not fixed in advance and agreements were not binding. The agent negotiated with human subjects in the U.S. and Lebanon in situations that varied the dependency relationships between participants at the onset of negotiation. There was no prior data available about the way people would respond to different negotiation strategies in these two countries. Results showed that the agent was able to adopt a different negotiation strategy to each country. Its average performance across both countries was equal to that of people. However, the agent outperformed people in the United States, because it learned to make offers that were likely to be accepted by people, while being more beneficial to the agent than to people. In contrast, the agent was outperformed by people in Lebanon, because it adopted a high reliability measure which allowed people to take advantage of it. These results provide insight for human-computer agent designers in the types of multi-cultural settings which we considered, showing that adaptation is a viable approach towards the design of computer agents to negotiate with people when there is no prior data of their behavior.

show abstract

Culture and egocentric perceptions of fairness in conflict and negotiation.

Cited by 139 publications

References 56 publications

The effect of other orientation on self–supervisor rating agreement

The effect of other orientation on self–supervisor rating agreement

System Justification, Satisfaction, and Perceptions of Fairness and Typicality at Work: A Cross-System Comparison Involving the U.S. and Hungary

An Adaptive Agent for Negotiating with People in Different Cultures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About