Social motives in integrative negotiation: The mediating influence of procedural fairness

Bianca Beersma*, Carsten K W De Dreu

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review


Although a large body of research has examined the influence of social motives on integrative negotiation, little is known about how social motives affect procedural fairness judgments in negotiation. In two experiments concerned with small group negotiation, we manipulated group members' social motives (pro-social vs. egoistic), and measured joint negotiation outcomes and procedural fairness. Experiment 1 showed that, compared to group members with an egoistic motivation, those with a pro-social motive experienced more procedural fairness, which was partly responsible for the higher joint outcomes they obtained. In Experiment 2, we manipulated social motives and decision rule. Results showed that pro-social groups experienced more procedural fairness than egoistic groups when a majority rule was applied, but not when a unanimity rule was applied.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)217-239
Number of pages23
JournalSocial Justice Research
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2003


  • Group negotiation
  • Procedural fairness
  • Social motives


Dive into the research topics of 'Social motives in integrative negotiation: The mediating influence of procedural fairness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this