Judgment of Ingroups and Outgroups in Intra- and Intercultural Negotiation: The Role of Interdependent Self-Construal in Judgment Timing

Abstract

Extending the common ingroup identity model (Gaertner et al. 1993, European Reveiw of Social Psycology, Vol. 4, pp. 1–26) and social categorization theory (Turner et al. 1987, Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.), the current study investigates when superordinate categorization with an opponent occurs during intra- and intercultural integrative negotiation. I hypothesize that a high level of interdependent self-construal (Markus and Kitayama 1991, Psychological Review, 98, 224–253) is associated with early superordinate categorization with an opponent and favorable judgment of an opponent’s cultural group before negotiation takes place, whereas a low level of interdependent self-construal shows favorable judgment of an ingroup and outgroup after negotiation is closed. One hundred fourteen participants of the U.S. and the Republic of Korea completed a multi-issue negotiation simulation with integrative potential in either intracultural or intercultural dyads. Results support the hypotheses. I discuss theoretical and practical implications of the sensitivity of interdependent self-construal to social context and fluid boundaries of ingroups and outgroups, and the role of integrative negotiation in improving intergroup relations in globalizing and multicultural organizations and societies.