It is said that two people with different attitudes can together make satisfactory decisions, in spite of their opposite personalities, a recent study suggests. Customers habitually make joint decisions with others like in which restaurant to eat, what film to watch, or where to travel on vacation. Many researchers from the Boston College, Georgia Tech, and Washington State University wanted to see if people with opposite attitudes may return to satisfactory decisions together.
The studies found that when we paired with a selfish partner, it’s better to behave altruistically rather than selfishly. Similarly, when paired with an altruistic partner, it’s better to behave selfishly to attain the required outcome, according to the findings, reported recently within the Journal of Consumer psychological science.
In both the situations, the couple respondents were able to come in a decision, which will be the best reflected on their individual preferences, or what each partner is personally liked – if they took the alternative angle as that of their partner, aforesaid Hristina Nikolova, lead author of the study.
“When you see that your partner is acting egotistically, it’s better to let it go and act selflessly instead; allow them to make the decision because this may ultimately ensure a much better outcome for you than if you act egotistically too,” Nikolova explained.
According to the researchers, within the joint decision-making of an altruistic and selfish consumer, the selfish partner would volitionally specific his/her desired preference, whereas the altruistic partner can possibly settle for these suggestions. Since consumers’ preferences are additional similar than they acknowledge, an altruistic individual can possibly get a possibility that he/she somewhat prefers even when a selfish partner drives the choice.
Thus, no matter who drives the decision, both partners are likely to reach a joint call that’s comparatively most well-liked by each of them. According to Nikolova, conventional wisdom suggests that standing one’s ground is related to positive outcomes. But that’s not essentially the case.
“In the context of joint choices, however, we find that 2 selfish heads do worse than one altruistic and one selfish head; 2 ungenerous consumers conjointly opt for choices that neither of them prefers. This happens because both partners are possible to be stiffly self-oriented when negotiating with others,” she said.
For people who are selfish in nature, assent runs counter to their nature. The study found that selfish people are likely to fulfill suggestions with counteroffers even when the suggestions somewhat coincide with their own preferences. And that would possibly really be a nasty issue.
“This propensity to counteroffer rather than concede unwittingly ends up in negotiation. If the two selfish partners are rejected trade offers till they come to an option that’s further down both of their preference lists but is deemed acceptable by both partners,” Nikolova added.