Experimental Research on the Psychology of Conflict Bargaining

Session Submission Type: Full Paper Panel

Session Description

Although most literature on international conflict bargaining has relied on the assumption of rationality, recent research has shown that it is fruitful to explore how individual psychology might cause bargainers to deviate from the behavior predicted by rational actor models. The papers on this panel use survey experiments to explore how both leader and audience psychology affect the conflict bargaining process. Two papers explore how a bargainer’s own psychology affects decision-making in a conflict bargaining situation. The first, by Powers and Altman, investigates how reactance – a tendency to seek to restore a sense of autonomy when it is threatened – can lead to coercion failure. The second, by Giddings and Trager, shows how historical conflict, military humiliation, and conciliatory diplomacy affect respondents’ willingness to support conflict or cooperation with another state. In a third paper, McManus explores how perceptions of an adversary’s psychology – in particular the perception that the adversary suffers from a particular form of madness – affects willingness to compromise in conflict bargaining. Finally, Powers and Renshon examine how perceptions of status affect public evaluations of leaders, which has important implications for leaders’ conflict bargaining decisions.

Sub Unit

• DIVISION 21: Conflict Processes

Individual Presentations

• What Makes an Adversary? Determining Bargaining Preferences in Crises - Cody Matthew Giddings, University of California, Los Angeles; Robert F. Trager, UCLA

• The Effect of Perceived Madness on Coercion: An Experimental Approach - Roseanne McManus, Pennsylvania State University

• The Puzzle of Coercion Failure: How Psychology Explains Resistance to Threats - Kathleen E Powers, Dartmouth College; Dan Altman, Georgia State University

• International Status and Support for Political Leaders - Ryan M. Powers, University of Georgia

Chair

• Michael R. Tomz Stanford University

Discussants

• Michael R. Tomz Stanford University

• Joshua D. Kertzer Harvard University