Do-no-harm in coalition formation: Why losses inhibit exclusion and promote fairness cognitions

Understanding the influence of outcome valence in bargaining: A study on fairness accessibility, norms, and behavior

“…Together, this suggests that individuals are driven by the do-no-harm principle (Baron, 1995(Baron, , 1996Van Beest, Wilke, & Van Dijk, 2003;Van Beest et al, 2005), which states that people are reluctant to harm one party to benefit another one. We argued that people consider inflicting a loss to the other party as more harmful than withholding a gain and are therefore less motivated to maximize their own outcomes in a negatively valenced bargaining.…”

“…For instance, research on coalition bargaining (Van Beest, Van Dijk, De Dreu, & Wilke, 2005) and procedural fairness (Van Prooijen, Van den Bos, & Wilke, 2002) shows that the accessibility of the fairness concept differs depending on the social situation. For example, Van Prooijen et al (2002) showed that status salience increases fairness accessibility.…”

“…The first perspective, based on the do-no-harm principle (Baron, 1995;Van Beest et al, 2005), suggests that bargaining about negatively valenced payoffs makes fairness a more important motivator than bargaining about positively valenced payoffs. As explained before, the do-no-harm principle states that people are reluctant to benefit themselves if this implies that they harm the other party (Baron, 1995;.…”

“…Research on this subject that is more closely related to the context of bargaining is the work of Van Beest et al (2005) on coalition formation. Van Beest et al studied coalition bargaining in situations where negotiators could benefit themselves by either maximizing a gain or by minimizing a loss.…”

A Game-Theoretic Analysis of Hezong and Lianheng-Simultaneous and Sequential Moves

“…People are less willing to exclude others when it's explicitly harmful to exclude. And Beest et al (2005) show that participants are more unwilling to exclude others in order to minimize their harm than to maximize their gains. And participants are most influenced by payoff valence when they are inclined to consider the viewpoint of others.…”