The Initiation of Superordinate Goals

The following is an exploratory study comparing the initiation of two types of superordinate goals in a highly competitive, nonzero-sum bargaining situation. One superordinate goal was introduced by a third party, was perceived by the participants as a natural event not linked to or created by the third party, and was not perceived by the bargainers in the conflict to be aimed at resolving the conflict. The other superordinate goal was initiated by one of the participants in the conflict, was identified with the initiator, and was perceived as being aimed at resolving the conflict. A variation of the standard intergroup conflict exercise was used for the study. The data indicate that the first type of superordinate goal resolved the competition between the groups but in a way which, it is hypothesized, may lead to premature agreement, leaving the basic conflict of interests unresolved. The second type of superordinate goal, on the other hand, became caught up in the competitiveness of the situation and increased, rather than decreased, the competition.