'Negotiation Behavior and Negotiation Norms'
(AsPredicted #67998)

---

---

1) Have any data been collected for this study already?
No, no data have been collected for this study yet.

2) What's the main question being asked or hypothesis being tested in this study?
H1: Girls will negotiate less with a man than a woman

H2: Boys will not negotiate differently with a man and a woman

H3: If a difference is observed among girls (such that they girls negotiate less with a man than a woman), this difference will be (partially) explained by some combination of the following factors: (1) girls' perceptions of anticipated backlash from men vs. women in the context of negotiation, (2) girls' perceptions of prescriptive norms in negotiations with men vs. women, and/or (3) girls' perceptions of descriptive norms in negotiations with men vs. women.

3) Describe the key dependent variable(s) specifying how they will be measured.
Participants will complete a Stroop task (with a primary experimenter, E1), negotiation task (with a secondary experimenter, E2), and perceptions of negotiation (E1).

We will measure children's:
1. Stroop task performance: percent of trials correct, reaction time
2. negotiation behavior: "How many pictures do you think you should get as a bonus?" open ended, numeric response
If children ask for more than 2 pictures, we will tell them they asked for too many and ask the same question as above again
3. perceived performance: "How well do you think you did at that activity? About the same as other kids your age (0), worse than other kids your age (a little: -1; a lot: -2), or better than other kids your age (a little: 1; a lot: 2)?"

Perceptions of negotiation:
4. anticipated backlash: "Would [she/he] have been [annoyed/liked you less/given you all the pictures you asked for] if you asked for 2/4/6/8/10/12/14/16/18/20 pictures?" At the point participants say "yes" to backlash, we stop and move onto the next question.
5. descriptive norms of negotiation: "How many pictures do you think kids usually ask [him/her] for?" Open ended response.
6. prescriptive norms of negotiation: "Would it have been rude/okay to ask [her/him] for 2/4/6/8/10/12/14/16/18/20 pictures?" At the point participants say it would be rude/not okay, we stop and move onto the next question.

4) How many and which conditions will participants be assigned to?
There will be 2 between subject conditions: either a male or a female E2.

5) Specify exactly which analyses you will conduct to examine the main question/hypothesis.
H1 & H2: To address whether girls' (but not boys') negotiation behavior differs based on condition (i.e., the gender of the person they're negotiating with, E2), we will use a mixed-effects model to regress participants' negotiation on participants' gender, age, condition, and all possible interactions, with a random intercept for E2.

H3: To address whether the condition difference in negotiation observed among girls is (partially) explained by some combination of (1) anticipated backlash, (2) prescriptive norms, and/or (3) descriptive norms, we will compare the coefficient of condition (i.e., gender of E2) -- and/or the coefficient of the condition x age interaction, if significant -- in two models: the "base model" (see below) and one of four "comparison models" (see below). In three of the comparison models, backlash, prescriptive norms, and descriptive norms will be added by themselves to the base model. In the fourth comparison model, they will be added simultaneously.

By comparing the coefficient for condition in the base model vs. comparison models 1-3, we will be able to establish what percentage of the condition effect is explained by each of the three variables separately (backlash, prescriptive norms, and descriptive norms). This "percentage explained" will be calculated using the following formula: [1 - (coefficient in comparison model x / coefficient in base model)] x 100

By comparing the coefficient for condition in the base model vs. comparison model 4, we will be able to establish what percentage of the condition effect is explained by the three variables simultaneously.

Base Model: girls' negotiation ~ age*condition + (1|E2)

Comparison Model 1: girls' negotiation ~ age*condition*backlash + (1|E2)
Comparison Model 2: girls' negotiation ~ age*condition*prescriptive + (1|E2)
Comparison Model 3: girls' negotiation ~ age*condition*descriptive + (1|E2)
Comparison Model 4: girls' negotiation ~ age*condition*backlash + age*condition*prescriptive + age*condition*descriptive + (1|E2)

(Note: These analyses essentially ask what percentage of the total effect of condition (i.e., E2 gender) on girls' negotiation is mediated by backlash, prescriptive norms, and descriptive norms, separately and collectively. We may choose to present the results of these analyses in a mediation context.)

6) Describe exactly how outliers will be defined and handled, and your precise rule(s) for excluding observations.
* We will exclude any participants whose parents tell them how to respond or otherwise interfere with the session.

* Because at least some data will be collected over the online platform Zoom, we will also exclude participants whose sessions encountered major technical issues (e.g., sound level, connectivity issues).

* Participants who do not finish the study (for technical or other reasons) will not be included in the analyses.

* We may exclude children who request a number of pictures that is above or below 3 standard deviations of the mean for the entire sample.

7) How many observations will be collected or what will determine sample size?
No need to justify decision, but be precise about exactly how the number will be determined.
We will collect data from 200 7- to 12-year-old children after exclusions (50 girls with female E2, 50 girls with male E2, 50 boys with female E2, 50 boys with male E2).

8) Anything else you would like to pre-register?
(e.g., secondary analyses, variables collected for exploratory purposes, unusual analyses planned?)
We will also explore (1) how child gender, condition (E2 gender), and their interaction predict perceptions of negotiation (backlash, prescriptive norms, and descriptive norms), as well as (2) how child gender, condition (E2 gender), perceptions of negotiation, and their interactions relate to negotiation behavior. We will use mixed-effects models with a random intercept for E2 to explore these questions.

We may also use Bayes factors to quantify the evidence for H1 and H2.

We will also collect demographic data such as children's race/ethnicity and the US region they live in. We may test whether individual children's decisions to negotiate and perceptions of negotiation are moderated by any of these demographic factors.

Due to the open response nature of the negotiation and descriptive-norms questions, we may transform participants' responses (e.g., log or square root) in order to adjust for a potential positive skew in responses.

We may also include (1) perceived performance and/or (2) actual performance on the Stroop task (% correct and reaction time) as covariates in our primary regression predicting children's negotiation.

We may also collect data in person (COVID permitting). If so, the methods/DVs will be the same. We may pilot 1-2 in person participants to ensure that data collection goes smoothly and there are no unforeseen hurdles.

We will also collect children's communal values as responses to four questions ("How important do you think it is (1) to always try to make other people happy? (2) that other people like you? (3) to always be nice to other people? (4) think about other people's feelings"? 5 pt scale for each question), and may examine relationships between children's communal values and their negotiation behavior and/or perceptions of negotiation.

---

Report a bug     |   Make a suggestion     |   Terms of use     |   Help     |   About