Index

Accommodating (conflict resolution), 136, 138

Active listening, 127–130, 158

Agendas: anchoring and concessions, 76; home versus work negotiations, 6; multiple agendas, 6, 12; planned agendas, 144–145; and roles, 83, 91

Agreement bias, 22

Analogical transfer, 10–12

Anchoring and insufficient adjustment bias, 76–80, 155–156

Artificially high stakes, 74–75

“Ask your mother/father,” 7, 84, 157

Attention residue, 109

Avoiding (conflict resolution), 136–137, 138

Back-channeling, 129

Bedtime negotiations, 4, 6, 7, 38, 42, 73, 150, 160

Bias blind spot, 69

Biased punctuation, 70

Biases and pitfalls, 67–68; agreement bias, 22; anchoring and insufficient adjustment bias, 76–80, 155–156; artificially high stakes, 74–75; bias blind spot, 69; biased punctuation, 70; decision-making biases, 68–80; definition of bias, 68; escalation of commitment, 71–74; five big ideas, 80; misremembering the origins, 69–71; previous decisions, 71–74; projection, 70; reactive devaluation, 71; status quo bias, 73; sunk cost fallacy, 72; test drive, 155–156; “throwing good money after bad,” 73; too-high-stakes bias, 75; winner’s curse, 75–76

Bierce, Ambrose, 118

Chores negotiations, 6, 12, 29, 35, 59, 79, 96. See also Cleaning negotiations; Garbage (chores) negotiations

Cleaning negotiations, 19, 38, 43, 50, 75, 96

Coach (role), 92–96; as children age, 95; common ground, 95; main event, 94–95; neutral location, 93; opening statement, 93–94

Collaborating (conflict resolution), 137, 138–139

Commitment, escalation of, 71–74

Common ground, 58, 94, 95, 157

Common information effect, 87–88

Communication: and conflict, 139–145; effective language, 139–141; nonverbal communication, 142–143; planned agendas, 144–145; and similarity effect, 145; test drive, 157–158. See also Text-based communication and texting

Competing (conflict resolution), 135–136, 138

Compromising (conflict resolution), 138, 139

Conflict and communication, 133–134; accommodating (conflict resolution), 136, 138; addressing negativity immediately, 143–144; avoiding (conflict resolution), 136–137, 138; and choice, 138–139; collaborating (conflict resolution), 137, 138–139; competing (conflict resolution), 135–136, 138; compromising (conflict resolution), 138, 139; effective language, 139–141; learned behavior, 134–135; nonverbal communication, 142–143; planned agendas, 144–145; responsiveness and control, 135–138; and similarity effect, 145; test drive, 160–161

Conformity pressures, 55–56

Contrasts, use of, 57–59

Deal-breakers, 17, 24, 28–29, 30, 31, 84, 151

Decision making: biases, 155; and communication, 110–111; different styles of, 156; and emotions, 117; online versus face-to-face, 110; science of, 68–69; and self-awareness, 150

Disrespect, 36

Distributive justice, 40–41

Door in the face, 57–58

Email, 103, 107, 111. See also Text-based communication and texting

Emojis, 107, 158

Emotional congruence, 121

Emotions, 117; and active listening, 127–130; and children, 126–127; and communication, 99–100, 104, 105, 106–107, 112; emotional congruence, 121; emotional culture, 120; five big ideas, 130; home versus work negotiations, 5; labeling, 127, 130; neuroscience of, 118–120; and rationality, 122–126; and silence, 119; snap judgments, 121–122; test drive, 158–159; venting, 143–144

Equality logic, 40–41

Equity logic, 41

Escalation of commitment, 71–74

Everyday conflict, 133–134; accommodating, 136; and communication, 139–145

“Everyone else is doing it” (conformity pressures), 55–56

Exhaustion (as a tactic), 59–61

Experience, learning from, 7

Fairness, 39–43; and consistency, 40; distributive justice and equality logic, 40–41; interactional justice and need-based logic, 41–43; and language, 40; procedural justice and equity logic, 41

Five big ideas: biases and pitfalls, 80; conflict and communication, 145–146; emotions, 130; home versus work negotiation skills, 12–13; preparation and planning, 30–31; roles, 96–97; strategy, 47; tactics and psychology, 63–64; text-based communication and texting, 112–113

Follett, Mary Parker, 17

Food negotiations, 4, 6, 41, 51, 140–141, 151–152, 155–156

Foot in the door, 58–59

Garbage (chores) negotiations, 22–23, 24, 27, 28, 29

Goals: and brainstorming, 169–170; and compromise, 138, 139; and conflict, 135, 138, 139; home versus work negotiation skills, 3, 4, 9, 12; and planning, 15–16, 18, 19, 21, 26, 31, 151; and psychological tactics, 53; and strategy, 44, 45

Good cop/bad cop (roles), 88–91

Haircut negotiations, 28

Home versus work negotiation skills, 3–12; and carry-over, 5, 12; and emotion, 5, 12; and multiple agendas, 6, 12; and repetition, 5, 12; test drive, 150

Homework negotiations, 3, 6, 7, 19, 37, 39, 44, 55, 85, 124, 139

“Honor code” commitments, 63

Inert knowledge, 11

Insight, 34, 44–46

Interactional justice, 41–43

Interest, definition of, 21

Intermittent reinforcement, 59–60

Irrationality, 11, 25, 67–68, 71, 75, 155–156. See also Rationality

Judge (role), 91–92; as children age, 95

Justice: interactional, 41–43; procedural, 41

Kids guide to negotiating, 163–171; brainstorming, 169–170; deciding whether to negotiate, 164; explaining yourself, 169; questions to ask first, 167–168; thinking first, 165–166

Learned behavior, 134–135

“Let’s just split it,” 17, 18, 43–44

Liar’s advantage, 62

Locke, John, 57

Logic: equality logic, 40–41; equity logic, 41; need-based logic, 41–43

Lying, 61–63

Misremembering the origins, 69–71

Need-based logic, 41–43

Negativity: and conflict, 143–144; and technology, 107, 110–111

Negotiation, definition of, 4–5

Negotiation skills: and analogical transfer, 10–12; five big ideas, 12–13; home versus work, 3–13; incidence and statistics, 6–7; and learning from experience, 7; and paradoxes of parenting, 8–10

Neuroscience: of emotions, 118–120; of lying, 62

Novice, good, and master negotiators, 25

Open-ended questions, 129

Paradoxical leadership, 8–9; distance versus closeness, 9; requirements versus flexibility, 9; self-centeredness versus other-centeredness, 9; uniformity versus individualization, 9

Paraphrasing, 129

Parenting styles, 90, 135, 156; authoritarian, 135; authoritative, 135; permissive, 135

Pitfalls. See Biases and pitfalls

Polarization, 88

Position, definition of, 21

Power, 33–34, 35–38

Preparation and planning: deal-breakers, 17, 24, 28–29, 30, 31; example of three-question checklist, 29–30; five big ideas, 30–31; immediate versus perpetual events, 18–19; knowing reasons for negotiation, 19–20; perspective taking, 24–29; priorities, 16, 17, 19, 21, 24, 28–29, 30, 31; setting goals, 15–16; sharing reasons for negotiation, 20–24; test drive, 151–152; three-question checklist, 16–18

Priorities: and biases, 79, 80; and conflict, 135; and emotions, 117, 118, 125; and preparation, 16, 17, 19, 21, 24, 28–29, 30, 31; and psychological tactics, 61, 154; and roles, 84, 85, 96; and strategy, 42

Procedural justice, 41

Projection, 70

Psychology. See Tactics and psychology

Rational, definition of, 68

Rationality: and biases, 67–68, 69, 71, 75; defusing emotions, 124–125; and emotions, 122–126; moods, 124; physiological calming, 125; and self-awareness, 122–123; talking out loud, 125–126; triggers, 123. See also Irrationality

Rationalization, 20

Reactive devaluation, 71

Reciprocal concessions, 58

Reciprocity, 58

Response options: ignore it, 54, 55; name it, 54, 55; reframe it, 54, 55

Responsibility, 6, 19, 30, 43, 54

Responsiveness and control, 135–138

Roles: coach, 92–96; and common information effect, 87–88; five big ideas, 96–97; good cop/bad cop, 88–91; judge, 91–92; and polarization, 88; teammate, 84–88; test drive, 156–157

Rules, 6, 8–9, 30, 152; and communication, 99, 108; and conformity pressures, 55–56; distributive justice and equality logic, 40–41; and emotions, 130, 134, 135, 138, 140; and fairness, 39–40; interactional justice and need-based logic, 41–43; “let’s just split it” strategy, 43–44; procedural justice and equity logic, 41; and roles, 89, 93–94; and strategy, 38–47; and technology, 108

Schedule negotiations, 28, 156–157

Similarity effect, 145

Snap judgments, 121–122

Status quo bias, 73

Strategy, 33–35; fairness, 39–43; five big ideas, 47; go-to fair solution (“let’s just split it”), 43–44; insight, 34, 44–46; power, 33–34, 35–38; rules, 34, 38–39; test drive, 152–153

Sunk cost fallacy, 72

Tactics and psychology: charm, 53; conformity pressures, 55–56; door in the face, 57–58; exhaustion, 59–61; five big ideas, 63–64; foot in the door, 58–59; getting parents to yes, 51–53; guilt trips, 53; intermittent reinforcement, 59–60; lying, 61–63; meltdowns, 53; playing one parent off of another, 53; promises for future behaviors, 53; rational and persuasion appeals, 52; strategies used by children, 53–55; test drive, 153–155; “That’s not all,” 59; use of contrasts, 57–59

Teammate (role), 84–88; and common information effect, 87–88; complications and pressures, 84–85; definition of team, 84; good cop/bad cop, 88–91; tagging in and out, 86–87; and tunnel vision, 85–86; two heads are better than one, 85

Technology, 112; challenges of, 107–110; and communication, 99–113; and generational differences, 102; literacy, 8. See also Text-based communication and texting

Television negotiations, 37, 39, 40, 41, 51, 91

Test drives: biases and pitfalls, 155–156; communication, 157–158; conflict and communication, 160–161; conversations and negotiation, 150; emotions, 158–159; preparation and planning, 151–152; psychological tactics, 153–155; roles, 156–157; strategy, 152–153

Text-based communication and texting, 99–100; and attention residue, 109; and decision making, 110–111; email, 103, 107, 111; emojis, 107, 158; and emotions, 99–100, 104, 105, 106–107, 112; five big ideas, 112–113; human speech and texting, 104–106; and negative behavior, 110–112; and overconfidence, 103–104; and technology, 107–110; texting brevity and tone, 100–104; words and symbols, 106–107. See also Communication

Texting negotiations, 157–158, 164

“That’s not all,” 59

“Throwing good money after bad,” 73

Time pressure, 17, 22

Too-high-stakes bias, 75

Vacation and travel negotiations, 86, 152–153, 155–156, 159

Venting, 143–144

Winner’s curse, 75–76

Zero-sum game, 18