The Organizations of Academic Work
The Organizations of Academic Work
复制标题
学术工作的组织
DOI：
10.2307/1956974
复制
发表时间：
1977
影响因子：
6.8
通讯作者：
E. Gross
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. Gross
对数据解释的限制比我迄今为止看到的都要多。此外，直觉上看来“显而易见”的结论（例如，强硬在对手中产生软弱时更有利）被证明只是可能出现的几种可能性之一。虽然他在阐述坚韧的后果方面非常熟练，但他在确定坚韧的原因方面却遇到了更多的困难。战略问题是，我们如何知道对手是否强硬？有什么线索可以作为韧性的可靠指标吗？通过考虑背景因素对这一过程的影响来探讨这一问题。这些变量之间的紧密关系应该具有指导意义。然而，证据不允许我们做出这样的“推论跳跃”。虽然发现了一些关系，但这些关系很弱，总体上只占过程变量方差的5%。但并不是一切都完了！这些发现的更普遍的含义导致并支持了之前得出的结论：谈判者更多地依赖于他对形势的战略分析，而不是某种内在的软弱或强硬倾向。
tions that place restrictions on the interpretation of the data than I have seen done to date. Moreover, conclusions that appear to be intuitively "obvious" (e.g., toughness is more profitable when it generates softness in an opponent) are shown to be only one of several possibilities that could emerge. While he is very skillful in elaborating the consequences of toughness, he has more trouble ascertaining the causes of toughness. The strategic question is, How do we know whether an opponent will be tough? Are there cues that can be used as reliable indices of toughness? This issue is explored by considering the effects of background factors on the process. Strong relationships obtained between these variables should be instructive. The evidence, however, does not permit us to make such "inferential leaps." Although a number of relationships are found, these are weak, accounting overall for only 5 per cent of the variance in process variables. But all is not lost! The more general implication of these findings leads to, and bolsters, a conclusion arrived at earlier: a negotiator depends more on his strategic analysis of the situation than on some inherent tendency to be soft or tough.