1. Perception, Cognition, and Emotion
CHAPTER FIVE
Perception, Cognition, and Emotion
INB 350 Lecture
By: Ms. Adina Malik (ALK)

2. Learning Objectives Perception The process of cognition
Forms of perception disorder
The process of cognition
Cognitive biases or systematic errors
The role of moods and emotions
For causes of behavior
For consequences of outcome

3. Perception Perception is:
The process by which individuals connect to their environment.
A “sense-making” process
A complex physical and psychological process
It is defined as ‘the process of screening, selecting and interpreting stimuli so that they have meaning to the individual’ (Steers,1084).
Negotiators approach each situation guided by their perceptions of past situations and current behaviors and attitudes.
Their expectations of the future behaviors of other parties and subsequent outcomes are based largely on information gained through direct experience or observations.
People interpret their environment so that they can respond appropriately.
Environments are typically complex. This complexity makes it impossible to process all the available information, so perception becomes selective, tuning in on some stimuli while tuning out others.
Stimuli: something that causes physiological and psychological response.
Physiology: function of living organism

4. The Role of Perception
The process of ascribing meaning to messages and events is strongly influenced by the perceiver’s current state of mind, role, and comprehension of earlier communications
People interpret their environment in order to respond appropriately
The complexity of environments makes it impossible to process all of the information
People develop shortcuts to process information and these shortcuts create perceptual errors

5. Perceptual Distortion
Four major perceptual errors:
Stereotyping
Halo effects
Selective perception
Projection
Distortion by Generalization
Distortion based on Attributes
In any given negotiation, the perceiver’s own needs, desires, motivations, and personal experiences may create a predisposition about the other party. This is a cause of concern when it leads to biases and errors in perception and subsequent communication.
Perception distortion by generalization: small amounts of perceptual information are used to draw large conclusions about individuals.
Distortion based on attributes: form of distortion that involves anticipating certain attributes and qualities in another person.
Perceptual distortions are in sense ‘shortcuts’ that individuals use to make sense of very complex environments and situations. Unfortunately these shortcuts come with significant costs-perceptual errors, which typically occur without people being aware that they are happening and which have unfortunate consequences.
If initial assumptions are incorrect, then negotiators may not be able to reverse their effects; by the time negotiators are in a position to judge the predisposition of the other party accurately, the other party may have interpreted the initial competitive mood and defensive posture of the negotiator as offensive and antagonistic.

6. Stereotyping Is a very common distortion
Occurs when an individual assigns attributes to another solely on the basis of the other’s membership in a particular social or demographic category
For e.g.: ‘Old people are conservative; this person is old and therefore is conservative.’
Stereotypes are formed about a wide variety of different groups, for example, younger generation, males or females, Italians or Germans, or people of different races, religions or sexual orientations. People assign an individual to a group based on one piece of perceptual information (e.g. whether the individual is old or young). Then they assign a broad range of characteristics of that group to this individual.
For e.g.: ‘Young people are disrespectful; this person is young and therefore is disrespectful’. There is no factual basis for such conclusion.

7. Halo Effects Are similar to stereotypes
Occur when an individual generalizes about a variety of attributes based on the knowledge of one attribute of an individual
For e.g.: A smiling person is judged to be more honest than a frowning person, even though there is no consistent relationship between smiling and honesty.
It can be positive or negative
It can be positive or negative a good attribute may be generalized so that people are seen in a positive light, while a negative attribute may have a reverse effect.

8. Selective Perception
The perceiver singles out information that supports a prior belief but filters out contrary information
Perpetuates stereotypes or halo effects
For e.g.: Smile as honest or dishonest are likely to affect how the other party’s behavior is perceived or interpreted.
Selective Perception:
It occurs when a perceiver singles out certain information that supports or reinforces a prior belief and filters out information that does not confirm that belief.
Perpetuate: after forming quick judgments about individuals on the basis of limited information, people may then filter out further evidence that might disconfirm the judgment.
For e.g.: the predisposition to view the smile as honest or dishonest are likely to affect how the other party’s behavior is perceived or interpreted.

9. Projection Arises out of a need to protect one’s own self-concept
People assign to others the characteristics or feelings that they possess themselves (position reversed)
For e.g. frustration
Projection:
Self-concept: to see myself as consistent and good.
Negotiators may assume that the other party would respond in the same manner they would if positions were reversed.
For e.g.: if a negotiator feels that he would be frustrated if he were in the other party’s position, then he is likely to perceive that the other party is frustrated

10. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation
Negotiators have a tendency to make systematic errors when they process information. These errors, collectively labeled cognitive biases, tend to impede negotiator performance.
Cognitive Biases:
Irrational escalation of commitment
Mythical fixed-pie beliefs
Anchoring and adjustment
Issue framing and risk
Availability of information
The winner’s curse
Overconfidence
The law of small numbers
Self-serving biases
Endowment effect
Ignoring others’ cognitions
Reactive devaluation

11. Irrational Escalation of Commitment and Mythical Fixed-Pie Beliefs
Negotiators maintain commitment to a course of action even when that commitment constitutes irrational behavior
To avoid it parties should involve advisor who will work as a reality check point
Mythical fixed-pie beliefs
Negotiators assume that all negotiations (not just some) involve a fixed pie
To avoid it parties should introduce accountability in the negotiation context

12. Anchoring and Adjustment and Issue Framing and Risk
The effect of the standard (anchor) against which subsequent adjustments (gains or losses) are measured
The anchor might be based on faulty or incomplete information, thus be misleading
Thorough preparation, along with reality check can help to avoid it
Issue framing and risk
Frames can lead people to seek, avoid, or be neutral about risk in decision making and negotiation

13. Availability of Information and the Winner’s Curse
Operates when information that is presented in vivid or attention-getting ways becomes easy to recall.
Becomes central and critical in evaluating events and options
The winner’s curse
The tendency to settle quickly on an item and then subsequently feel discomfort about a win that comes too easily
The best remedy for winner’s curse is to prevent it from occurring

14. Overconfidence and The Law of Small Numbers
The tendency of negotiators to believe that their ability to be correct or accurate is greater than is actually true
The law of small numbers
The tendency of people to draw conclusions from small sample sizes
The smaller sample, the greater the possibility that past lessons will be erroneously used to infer what will happen in the future

15. Self-Serving Biases and Endowment Effect
People often explain another person’s behavior by making attributions, either to the person or to the situation
The tendency, known as fundamental attribution error, is to:
Overestimate the role of personal or internal factors
Underestimate the role of situational or external factors
Endowment effect
The tendency to overvalue something you own or believe you possess

16. Ignoring Others’ Cognitions and Reactive Devaluation
Negotiators don’t bother to ask about the other party’s perceptions and thoughts
This leaves them to work with incomplete information, and thus produces faulty results
Reactive devaluation
The process of devaluing the other party’s concessions simply because the other party made them

17. Mood, Emotion and Negotiation
The distinction between mood and emotion is based on three characteristics:
Specificity
Intensity
Duration

18. Mood, Emotion and Negotiation
Negotiations create both positive and negative emotions
Aspects of the negotiation process can lead to positive emotions
Positive feelings result from fair procedures during negotiation
Positive feelings result from favorable social comparison
Positive emotions generally have positive consequences for negotiations
They are more likely to lead the parties toward more integrative processes
They also create a positive attitude toward the other side
They promote persistence

19. Mood, Emotion and Negotiation
Aspects of the negotiation process can lead to negative emotions
Negative emotions may result from a competitive mindset
Negative emotions may result from an impasse

20. Mood, Emotion and Negotiation
Negative emotions generally have negative consequences for negotiations
They may lead parties to define the situation as competitive or distributive
They may undermine a negotiator’s ability to analyze the situation accurately, which adversely affects individual outcomes
They may lead parties to escalate the conflict
They may lead parties to retaliate and may thwart integrative outcomes

21. Mood, Emotion and Negotiation
However,
Effects of positive and negative emotion
Positive emotions may generate negative outcomes
Negative feelings may elicit beneficial outcomes
Emotions can be used strategically as negotiation gambits