The psychological study of negotiation, influenced by economics, has long emphasized the interests of the bargaining parties as the main driver of the negotiation process. This remains the case, even though psychological research has shown that individuals do not behave in the manner predicted by classical economics. A main drawback of the concept of interests is that it is an individual-level construct and, therefore, does not tap directly into the interindividual nature of the negotiation process. In contrast, entitlements can serve as the key notion in the study of negotiation, both conceptually and epistemologically. I argue that at the heart of negotiation is a rule-making process through which parties define each other’s entitlements and duties. If we view negotiation in this way, we can study it as the primary vehicle for the explicit determination of social norms, obligations, and “ought” standards that permeate social life. This view has ramifications for the study of negotiation itself, for the social-psychological study of coregulation, and even for the function of society as a whole.

长期以来，在经济学的影响下，对谈判的心理学研究一直强调谈判方的利益是谈判过程的主要推动力。即使心理学研究表明个人没有按照古典经济学所预测的方式行事，情况依然如此。利益概念的主要缺点是它是个人层面的结构，因此不能直接利用谈判过程的个体性质。相反，权利可以在概念和认识论上成为谈判研究的关键概念。我认为，谈判的核心是规则制定过程，各方通过该过程来定义彼此的权利和义务。如果我们以这种方式看待谈判，我们可以将其作为明确确定贯穿社会生活的社会规范，义务和“应有”标准的主要工具进行研究。这种观点对谈判本身的研究，对调节的社会心理学研究甚至对整个社会的功能都有影响。