Role Effects in Negotiation: The One-Down Phenomenon

Role is a concept that underlies most studies of human behavior in negotiation as subjects take on the roles of buyers and sellers or labor and management contract bargainers, for example Naturalistic studies also focus on such roles as teacher and administrator contract bargainers, hostage takers and hostage negotiators, Palestinian and Israeli peace negotiators, and husbands and wives in divorce mediations. This article examines these role effects and finds consistent patterns across both experimental and naturalistic contexts. Specifically, a "one-down effect" emerges when individuals in lower power roles assume more aggressive negotiation strategies that are significantly less effective in achieving desired outcomes. The article concludes by identifying the theoretical frameworks that might explain these role differences.     

The Steering Group as Policy Advice Instrument: A Case of “Consultocracy” in Stadium Subsidy Deliberations

This study considers the use of steering groups and private consultants as sources of policy advice to local governments. More particularly, our research addresses the combined role of a government-appointed working party and consulting firm in the deliberation process precipitating from proposals to renovate/re-build a sports stadium. Through this New Zealand-based case, we explore the political tensions arising from the Working Party's mandates to consult and its role as vehicle to market policy solutions. Data is gleaned from interviews with working party members (and their consultants), observations of public consultations and analysis of documents (e.g., background papers, reports, and press releases). Implications of this institutional arrangement are discussed in light of recurring logics, tensions and paradoxes. We first consider the Carisbrook Working Party as an instrument of policy advice and distinguish its founding logic from other forms such as task forces or commissions of inquiry. We further discuss the paradoxes of the Working Party's procedural and political imperatives including its roles as facilitators of the process, advocates of the “problem,”and as authoritative proclaimers of certainty.     

GUIDELINES FOR UTILIZING COLLATERAL SOURCES OF INFORMATION IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

A structure for utilizing third party or collateral sources of information in the child custody evaluation is discussed. Collateral information is vital to the process of trying to assess the credibility and validity of information obtained from the primary parties in a dispute. Information that is from more neutral parties has higher credibility and when the party has access to key information it produces more discriminant validity. When a source with high discriminant validity agrees with information from a primary party, then it enhances the convergent validity on an issue or hypothesis. Child custody cases are inherently characterized by biased data within the adversarial process. Gathering data from collateral sources and using a system to evaluate their usefulness on confirmation of hypotheses is a necessary part of the emerging forensic-clinical-scientific child custody evaluation paradigm.