This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Raiffa, H. (1982).Â The Art and Science of Negotiation: How to Resolve Conflicts and Get the Best Out of Bargaining.Â United States of America: Library of Congress Cataloging in Publications Data.Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Howard Raffia's life was very much influenced by the variety of people he met all throughout his days of studying. At first he was very interested in the Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, but as he progressed his interests shifter in a deeper sense. He studied, graduated and taught in the University of Michigan, and after receiving his doctorate in 1951 he accepted to teach Statistics in the Department of statistics and Game Theory in the graduate school of Administration in Harvard.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â He realized that if you wait long enough, the opposition will gradually propose what you desire, by then it'll be easier to open for negotiations. In his book he talks about the art and science of Negotiation. Science in a sense that it is a systematic analysis for problem solving and it is art because it includes interpersonal skills. He believes that there are disputes between people in any kind of situation, whether you're married or not, single, divorced, young or old, etc. Progress is achieved by engaging individuals in a certain situation which increases tension and conflict may be a great organizing strategy. This book's main concern is with the situations in which two or more parties realizes the difference of interests and the values that exists among them and in which they seek to land a compromise. [REVISE]
Carraro, C., Marchiori, C., & Sgobbi, A. (2006). Advances in Negitiation Theory: Bargaining, Coalitions, and Fairness.Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.Â 1-5. Retrieved July 10, 2010 from Social Science Research Network
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â With a PH.D. achieved from Princeton University and a teaching career at the University of Venice, Carlo Carraro is on the top of his game. Aside from those impressive credentials he is also the Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei's research director. One of his accomplices, Carmen Marchiori teaches at the London School of Economics. She's very interested in Environmental economics and development, climate change, game and negotiation theory. While their third accomplice, Alessandra Sgobbi also achived a PH.D. at the School of Advanced studies in the Venice Foundation. She's mainly interested in the integration of soft and hard sciences in the formation of the economy-environment systems, and the study of the Negotiation process. In the area of the natural resources management and climate change formation she teams up with FEEM in various projects. She's also an active member of the Coalition Theory Network.Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Bargaining is a natural thing that happens daily. It is one of the major factors in a political and business sense. The non-cooperative approach used in negotiations isÂ the main focus of this paper whichÂ is essential to the study of international negotiations. Thus the tactical choices of the parties included in this process require to be exquisitely planned out so that we can determine the final outcome of the negotiation. In a bargaining situation is when there are certain individuals have the possibility of closing a mutually beneficial deal.Â There will always be conflict with theÂ variety of interests from the players, and there's a rule that no agreement is effective without each of the players approval. This Non-cooperative bargaining theory's main focus is on the bargaining procedures in the attempt to determine win-win outcome that will prevail in the absence of interventions. When multiple players or parties are involved, there's a great possibility that coalitions are formed. In this scenario the traditional bargaining theory may not be represent this becauseÂ it is believed that there can only beÂ two possible results; the fully cooperative outcome and the fully non-cooperative outcome
The Non-cooperative coalition theory considers the aspect of the negotiation process and analyzes the incentives which the players may have to do to form coalitions and how they can affect the final result. This study of the coalition formation is essential in bargaining contexts where positive externalities are present. While the theory of Fair Division mainly focuses on the processes and strategies which responds not only to the Pareto Efficiency, but also to equity, envy free, and immunity to a tactical manipulation. The cooperative bargaining theory focuses on the problem of how to equally divide the benefits among the negotiating parties. Limitation is that you cannot capture the specific details of the bargaining process. As for justification the rational players will choose the result that will maximize their value, and that the most efficient solution will always be realized regardless of the process used. While the non-cooperative bargaining theory analyzes the exact procedures of the bargaining theory in order to find theoretical predictions of what agreement will be reached by the players. In a nut shell this approach seeks to identify the main strategies that may sustain cooperation and the variables that may influences behavior such as bargaining power, incomplete information, and power relations.
Â This journal supports the seminal theory because...
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Buelens, M. & Mestdagh. (200). Thinking Back In Where We're Going: A Methodological Assessment of Five Decades of Research in Negotiation Behavior.Â Research Methods in Negotiation,Â 1, 1-6. Retrieved July 13, 2010 from Social Science Research Network
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Prof.Â Dr. Marc Buelens teaches management at Ghent University and Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School and a weekly columnist for 'Trends'.
He has written several management books, with his wife Ann Vermeiren also bestsellers on self-care (Better Ensure Yourself) and smooth interpersonal relationships (The EPA-factor) whileÂ Steven Mestdagh as a psychologist at the department of management behavior of the Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.Â He worked with the realization of an organizational manual in English.Â Themes such as EQ, personality and decision are his favorites, the translation of basic insights into digestible takes his hobby.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The main point of this study is to gain insight in the main methodological and statistical practices that influenced Negotiation and made way for possible gaps and trade-offs. Because of the lack of decisive insights on the procedural practices and trends there's a possibility that researchers are unaware of the possible blind spots and trade-offs that may constrain its further development. Our main intention is to identify the procedural shifts and patterns that took place in a negotiation research over the past five decades, and to identify where negotiation research us headed in terms of trade-offs being made. We will explore the main practices and possible gaps within the areas of negotiation behavior. We also hope to provide sufficient insights and recommendations on some of the major methodological conflicts in the field.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Does it support or not?
Hawes, L. (2002).Â Negotiation TheoryÂ and Method.Â James Holbrook Law.1-2.Â
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â He graduated Macalester College in 1966, and in 1970 he earned his Ph.D. at the University of Minnesota in Communication and Organizational Studies.Â He has taught on the faculties at the University of Minnesota, The Ohio State University, where he was Director of the Organizational Communication Research Institute, at The Pennsylvania State University, where he was a Visiting Distinguished Professor, and since 1980 he has been Professor of Communication at the University of Utah. In 1990, he founded the Conflict Resolution Certificate Program at the University of Utah, a Program that trains thirty-four professional negotiators and mediators in an intensive year-long course.Â He has written and published widely throughout his academic career on topics ranging from communication theory and practice, to organizational conflict resolution, to corporate dispute resolution, problem-solving, decision-making and dialogue.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The process and product of Negotiation is Communication. As a communication process, negotiation takes place in several generic forms; distributive, integrative and transformative forms. This process goes through the system of reciprocity which is a system of taking turns; this act generates the forms of communication. It involves the 5 disciplines of strategic intelligence and tactical ingenuity. In a microscopic sense in each turn you take it basically cultivates your self-mastery, mental modes, vision, workability and integration. While in a macroscopic sense each process, form and outcome is a definite result of how these 5 disciplines are integrated in and through the turn by turn choices represents the communication process of Negotiation.Â
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Does it support of not?
Greene, J. (1984). A cognitive approach to human communication theory: An action assembly theory.Â Communication Monographs, 51, 289-306.
John Greene was born in Portsmouth, Virginia in 1954.Â Â He is currently aÂ Professor of Communication and the faculty Associate for Center for Aging and the Life Course at Purdue University. His study mainly focuses on the Development and Initial Tests of an Action Assembly Theory. Along with Capella they pioneered AAT to address a controversy over the presence of temporal rhythms in spontaneous speech. He won tons of honors and awards such as Outstanding Scholarly Edited Book Award in Applied Communication Division and National Communication Association in the year 2005, identified as one of the top 100 most productive researchers in the field of Communication during the period 1915-2001, received Charles H. Woolbert Research award in the Speech Communication Association in the year 1994, recognized as being among the most frequently cited authors in Communication and he was identified as one of the top three percent of most active communication researchers in a study of publication records performed by faculty members at the University of Miami.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The Action Assembly Theory is aÂ communication theory that focuses on theÂ psychologicalÂ and social influences on human action. This theory describes the creation of behavior in two vital processes: the retrieval of methodological Factors from your memory, and organizing these factors for the formations of an output representation of the action to take
Â This theory also seeks to explain the verbal and non-verbal message behavior.
Griffin, E. (2008).Â A First Look at Communication Theory.Â New York: McGraw-Hill.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Em Griffin is a professor at Wheaton College since 1970.Â When he was in the University of Michigan he achieved a bachelor's degree in Political science and while he was in Northwestern University he achieved a Ph.D. and M.A. in Communication.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â John Greene's AAT explains the mental process I went through to produce the message that the audience finally heard. He described the link between cognition and behavior, like how thoughts are transformed to actions or like basically how we put together what to say. Green said that the production of behavior involves two processes first is the retrieval of procedural elements and second is the organization of these elements to form an output presentations of action to be taken.
We construct our actions from our procedural records; which are personal pieces of the truth about our past behavior stored for possible use. The specific goal can be an action, feeling, or belief. According to AAT the more procedural record has been exercised the stronger it gets EDIT
Stork, S., & Schubbo, A. (2010). Human cognition in manual assembly: Theories and applications.Â Advanced Engineering Informatics.Â 320-327. Retrieved July 10, 2010 from Science Direct
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Dr. Sonja Stock is an Allgemeine und Experimentelle PsychologyÂ from theÂ
Department Psychology in Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenÂ in Germany. While Anne Schubbo is a senior lecturer of Experimental Psychology UnitÂ from the
Department PsychologieÂ in the same university.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Human cognition is studied with respect to various cognitive psychology findings and theories. This describes the effects of task complexity and demands on both mental overload and task performance. Compared to field studies one of the advantages of a theory-based approach is the possibility of power over all important influencing factors.Â Â In this study it we have to make up for manual assembly to the development of an assistive system. So far there are no extensive researches on the cognitive processes in production environments have been conducted. The information processed in a manual assembly involved the whole field of cognitive functions from attention, attention and memory to action planning and execution. This can be used to divide the complete assembly cycle into relevant processing stages.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â In this study it therefore proves the different aspects wherein you can apply the assembly theory. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Whaley, B. and Samter, W. (Ed.). (2007).Â Explaining Communication: Contemporary theories and exemplars.Â New Jersey:Â Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved July 5 2010 from googlebooks
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
This theory focuses on the essential processes of thinking and doing. It is cognitive theory this it seeks to explain complex phenomena in its simplest way. It also explains how people generate meanings and produce verbal and non-verbal behaviors that carry some relation to those meanings in a way that they describe how the mind carries out activities.Â Its two fundamental processes are Activation and Assembly and the three structures which are procedural records, unitized assemblies and output presentation.
Active-Theory of TV Viewing
Anderson, D. R., and Lorch, E. P. A Theory of the Active Nature of Young Children's Television Viewing. Paper presented to the Society for Research in Child Development. Biennal Meeting, San Francisco, March 1979.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Daniel Anderson and Elizabeth Lorch presented this to the Society for Research in Child Development in the year 1979. Their research and investigation is used as the theoretical formulation in which children's television viewings are seen as a transactional process.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â One of the common misconceptions about television viewing is that it is proof a child is a common victim of television is that when a child sits in a somewhat dark room he or she quietly gazes at the TV screen for an amount of time. Television is also perceived as addicting; once children are exposed they can never stop. But then the general cognitive developmental theory focuses in the active nature of children's passive cognition. The idea of the theory is that when a child views television they are representing their own active cognitive transactions with the environment, regarding that there are also active elements beside passive elements to TV viewing. It is that from this 'experience' a child learns how to develop strategies of TV viewing which is part of their interest in understanding what they are watching. In one of our studies between preschooler's visual attentions to TV programs; children who have other activities divide their attention between the television and that other activity. While a child who has no alternative activity gives out full attention in the TV. Â The longer a child gazes at the television screen the more he/she will keep looking. The child's attention is therefore locked with the television. While the longer a child has looked away from the TV it is more likely that he or she will not look back anymore. The conclusion of this research is that first a child's attention to television is greatly influenced by its environment; second is the comprehensibility of the TV program which is a determines whether a child will remain its attention. Third is that inertia works to maintain looking at the TV as well as not looking. Lastly is that attributes of the television serve to obtain, restrain, maintain, and terminate looking at the Television.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â This theory explains how television viewing affects the attention of young children
Foster, E. M., & Watkins, S. (2010).Â The Value of Reanalysis: TV Viewing and Attention Problems.Â Child Development.81. 368-371.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Both E. Michael Foster and Stephanie Watkins teach Maternal and Child Health School of Public Health at the University of Carolina.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â This study suggests that viewing television is associated with attention deficit disorder (ADD). Our goal is to reconsider whether little details are crucial to the changes in model specification at ages 1 and 3. And the effects of another hour of daily television to attention problems are quite small. We're concerned with the analyses that involved family factors that may have an effect with television watching. These analyses involved various factor such us background characteristics of the mother; like academic excellence, and income. Poverty status covers a family's ability to buy necessities which are very critical for a successful development. It might also be a factor on how much a child is allowed to watch television. Unobserved factors are impossible to measure, although they are accounted for in estimation.Â On way involves fixed-effects estimation, this method has been used for developmental analyses. This method allows children to have their own intercept. It implies that television viewing may reduce attention problems although was not statistically significant. Our analyses proved two things; one is that the link between early television viewing and its risk of having attention problems is only significant in 10% of children who watches 7 or more hours of television daily.
Newcomb, H. (2004). Encyclopedia of Television: Second Edition, Volume 1. New York: Taylor and Francis Group.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â He published the first edition of the book entitled; "Television: The Critical View" in the year 1976. He is also a professor of Telecommunications at the University of Georgia. His main profession in teaching focuses on screenwriting and television studies.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â This theory focuses to prove that attention is related to comprehension. For example when a child watches something that is designed for children attention is turned to that content. On the other hand when material is no long comprehensible or distractions occur attention is therefore deflected.
Stanley, B. and Davis, D. (2009).Â Mass Communication Theory: Foundation, Ferment, and Future, 5thEdition.Â Boston: WadsworthÂ Cengage Learning
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Stanley Baran earned his PH. D. in communication research at the University of Massachusetts after previously taking his M.A. in journalism at PSU (Pennsylvania State Univesity). Previously he was in charge of the Radio-TV-Film department graduate program and while there he won tons of teaching awards such as AMOCO Teaching Excellence Award as the best instructor in the campus. He currently he teaches in Bryant University and he is currently the founding chairman of the school's communication department. While Dennis K. Davis teaches mass communication theory, new media literacy, international communication, research method and political communication at Pennsylvania State University. He is also tenured as a professor at Cleveland State University, Southern Illinois University and the University of North Darkota. He also served as the editor of the Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media by Broadcast Education Association.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Active theory of Television viewing shows that children are both reactive and passive. It views the audience that they are actively and consciously trying the understand the content of what they are watching. Â This theory focuses on its cognitive nature. Beyond 2 Â½ years old your visual attention to the television increases but then later on levels of on your school age years. Once visual attention increases it reflects on your cognitive development.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â It journal supports the seminal work because they both explained that a child is both reactive and passive in terms of Television Viewing.