Cognitive Framing in Negotiation
How does Cognitive Framing Affect Negotiation?
If you still have questions or prefer to get help directly from an agent, please submit a request.
We’ll get back to you as soon as possible.
- Marketing, Advertising, Sales & PR
- Accounting, Taxation, and Reporting
- Professionalism & Career Development
Law, Transactions, & Risk Management
Government, Legal System, Administrative Law, & Constitutional Law Legal Disputes - Civil & Criminal Law Agency Law HR, Employment, Labor, & Discrimination Business Entities, Corporate Governance & Ownership Business Transactions, Antitrust, & Securities Law Real Estate, Personal, & Intellectual Property Commercial Law: Contract, Payments, Security Interests, & Bankruptcy Consumer Protection Insurance & Risk Management Immigration Law Environmental Protection Law Inheritance, Estates, and Trusts
- Business Management & Operations
- Economics, Finance, & Analytics
Table of ContentsWhat is Cognitive Framing in Negotiation?What are Interests, Rights, Power frames?Interests-based frames Rights-based frames Power-based frames Common Cognitive FramesSubstantive frame Outcome-based frame Aspiration frame Process-based frame Identity-based frame Characterization-based frame Loss - gain frame
What is Cognitive Framing in Negotiation?
A cognitive frame is a subjective mechanism through which people evaluate and make sense of situations, leading them to pursue or avoid subsequent actions. Common cognitive frames are discussed below.
Next Article: Mental models of negotiation Back to: NEGOTIATIONS
What are Interests, Rights, Power frames?
Ury, Brett, and Goldberg (1988) proposed an approach to framing disputes that view parties in conflict as using one of three frames:
People are often concerned about what they need, desire, or want. People talk about their positions, but often what is at stake is their underlying interests.
People may also be concerned about who is right that is, who has legitimacy, who is correct, or what is fair.
Negotiations resolved by power are sometimes based on who is physically stronger or is able to coerce the other, but more often, it is about imposing other types of costs economic pressures, expertise, legitimate authority, and so on.
Common Cognitive Frames
Other common characterizations of cognitive frames include:
This is a focus on what the conflict is about. Parties taking a substantive frame have a particular disposition about the key issue or concern in the conflict.
This is a party's predisposition to achieving a specific result or outcome from the negotiation.
This is a focus on satisfying a broader set of interests or needs in negotiation.
This is a focus on how (the process by which) the parties will go about resolving their dispute.
This is a focus on how the parties define who they are.
This regards how the parties see and define the other parties.
Loss - gain frame
This regards how the parties define the risk or reward associated with particular outcomes. It is difficult to know what frame a party is using unless the party tells you.
An individual's frame through which they interpret communication may create or be the source of biases.
Negotiators can use more than one frame at a time. Parties negotiate differently depending on the frame. Mismatches in frames between parties are sources of conflict.
Particular types of frames may be used with certain types of issues or lead to particular types of agreements. Parties are likely to assume a particular frame because of various factors, and a frame may change throughout a negotiation.
For example, the negotiation context clearly affects the way both sides define the issue and conversations that the parties have with each other about the issues in the bargaining mix.