Which psychological tactic is commonly used in negotiation?

Anchoring and framing techniques are prevalent psychological tactics used in negotiation. Anchoring involves establishing a reference point, or "anchor," which can significantly influence subsequent discussions and decisions. For instance, presenting an initial offer serves as an anchor that can shape the negotiation's range and perspective. This can lead to negotiations being skewed in favor of the party that sets the anchor, as the other party may adjust their expectations based on this starting point.

Framing, on the other hand, involves presenting information in a way that highlights certain aspects while downplaying others. This can affect how proposals are perceived and the emotional responses they elicit. A negotiator can frame an offer positively, emphasizing the benefits or potential gains, making it more attractive to the other party. Both techniques leverage psychological principles to enhance persuasion and influence during negotiations.

The other options do not reflect effective psychological tactics in negotiation. Insisting on personal opinions can often lead to conflict rather than productive dialogue. Eliminating competition entirely tends to be unrealistic in many negotiation scenarios, where multiple parties might have intersecting interests. Avoiding psychological strategies altogether ignores the fundamental ways in which human behavior and perception influence negotiation outcomes.