Toward a Better Understanding of the Mindsets of Negotiators
Development and Construct Validation of the Scale for the Integrative Mindset (SIM)
Abstract
Abstract. This article introduces and discusses the 15-item Scale for the Integrative Mindset (SIM) of negotiators, that is of people involved in joint decision-making processes. The scale is based on the integrative mindset (Ade, Schuster, Harinck, & Trötschel, 2018), which describes a set of three inclinations of parties approaching negotiations: a collaborative, a curious, and a creative one. Using a first sample (N = 1,030) of online survey participants, we provide evidence for a high psychometric quality of the SIM as suggested by high reliabilities and good fit indices. We also compare the SIM with scales that measure well-known and possibly related psychological constructs and show the SIM’s distinction to them. Using a second sample (N = 417), we show how the SIM differs from a Scale on Inappropriate Negotiation Strategies (SINS) that has been used in previous negotiation research. The findings of the present studies are discussed with respect to potential applications of the SIM in experimental research.
References
2018). Mindset-Oriented Negotiation Training (MONT): Teaching more than skills and knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 907. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00907
(2013). Seriousness checks are useful to improve data validity in online research. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 527–535. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0265-2
(2010). The additive value of positive psychological capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Management, 36, 430–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308329961
(1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197
(1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13
(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(2012). Using trait–state models to evaluate the longitudinal consistency of global self-esteem from adolescence to adulthood. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 634–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.07.005
(2006). The mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18, 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.18.2.192
(2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.
(1990).
(Action phases and mindsets . In T. E. HigginsR. M. SorrentinoEds., Handbook of motivation and cognition–foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 53–92). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.2012).
(Mindset theory of action phases . In P. Van LangeA. W. KruglanskiE. T. HigginsEds., Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 526–545). London, UK: Sage.1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariances structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
(2000). Structural equation modeling: Foundation and extensions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
(1988). Item context effects on personality scales: Measuring changes the measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 312–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.2.312
(1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review, 103, 263–283. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.263
(2007). Negotiation genius. New York, NY: Bantam.
(1990). A review of the depressive personality. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 830–837. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.147.7.830
(1984).
(Modes of linkage between perception and action . In W. PrinzA.-F. SandersEds., Cognition and motor processes (pp. 185–193). Berlin, Germany: Springer.2002). Standards for Internet-based experimenting. Experimental Psychology, 49, 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.49.4.243
(2000). Extending and testing a five factor model of ethical and unethical bargaining tactics: Introducing the SINS scale. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 649–664. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1379(200009)21:6<649::AID-JOB45>3.0.CO;2-%23
(2011). Item selection and validation of a brief, 15-item version of the Need for Closure Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.004
(2016). Growing beyond growth: Why multiple mindsets matter for consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26, 161–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.06.009
(2013). On the role of personality, cognitive ability, and emotional intelligence in predicting negotiation outcomes: A meta-analysis. Organizational Psychology Review, 3, 293–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386613505857
(2011). Perspective taking as a means to overcome motivational barriers in negotiations: When putting oneself into the opponent’s shoes helps to walk toward agreements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 771–790. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023801
(1921). Correlation and causation. Journal of Agricultural Research, 20, 557–585.
(