Preferring balanced vs. advantageous peace agreements: A study of Israeli attitudes towards a two state solution
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2010, Vol 5, Issue 6
Abstract
The paper extends research on fixed-pie perceptions by suggesting that disputants may prefer proposals that are perceived to be equally attractive to both parties (i.e., balanced) rather than one-sided, because balanced agreements are seen as more likely to be successfully implemented. We test our predictions using data on Israeli support for the Geneva Accords, an agreement for a two state solution negotiated by unofficial delegations of Israel and the Palestinian Authority in 2003. The results demonstrate that Israelis are more likely to support agreements that are seen favorably by other Israelis, but — contrary to fixed-pie predictions — Israeli support for the accords does not diminish simply because a majority of Palestinians favors (rather than opposes) the accords. We show that implementation concerns create a demand among Israelis for balance in the degree to which each side favors (or opposes) the agreement. The effect of balance is noteworthy in that it creates considerable support for proposals even when a majority of Israelis and Palestinians oppose the deal.
Authors and Affiliations
Deepak Malhotra and Jeremy Ginges
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677758
- DOI -
- Views 144
- Downloads 0
The effect of dynamic proximity cues on counterfactual plausibility
Previous research has found that people consult closeness or proximity cues when they evaluate the plausibility or likelihood of a counterfactual alternative to reality. In this paper we asked whether the plausibility of...
Cognitive conflict in social dilemmas: An analysis of response dynamics
Recently, it has been suggested that people are spontaneously inclined to cooperate in social dilemmas, whereas defection requires effortful deliberation. From this assumption, we derive that defection should entail more...
Framing effect in evaluation of others’ predictions
This paper explored how frames influence people’s evaluation of others’ probabilistic predictions in light of the outcomes of binary events. Most probabilistic predictions (e.g., “there is a 75% chance that Denver will w...
To trade or not to trade: The moderating role of vividness when exchanging gambles
Individuals are generally reluctant to trade goods—a phenomenon identified as the endowment effect. This paper focuses on consumers’ puzzling reluctance to exchange gambles, and in particular lottery tickets with identic...
Predecisional information distortion in physicians’ diagnostic judgments: Strengthening a leading hypothesis or weakening its competitor?
Decision makers have been found to bias their interpretation of incoming information to support an emerging judgment (predecisional information distortion). This is a robust finding in human judgment, and was recently al...