Hidden influences in international negotiations: The interactive role of insecure cultural attachment, risk perception, and risk regulation for sellers versus buyers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examines the previously unstudied role of cultural attachment in international negotiations. Specifically focusing on the fearful attachment style, this article reveals the intricate interaction of cultural attachment, risk perception, and risk regulation on negotiators' ability to claim value in international negotiation. Supporting our theorizing based on cultural attachment and prospect theory, findings show that risk‐averse sellers with fearful attachment to their national culture perceive greater risk and in turn are more motivated to regulate risk through relationship‐building with their counterpart (Study 1). Moreover, these individuals achieve lower economic gains when they regulate relational risk by making fewer threats to walk away (Study 2). We discuss the implications and the importance of understanding one's attachment to own national culture as its interplay with role and risk mechanisms impacts effectiveness in international negotiations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it