中文摘要：

现实生活中的谈判通常发生在特定的社会情境中，谈判者也总在扮演着某种角色。本研究探索了买卖交易谈判中谈判者角色影响谈判结果的作用机制。研究提出了一个关于谈判者角色诱发框架效应的理论模型，然后通过两个模拟谈判实验对这一模型进行验证。实验1表明，买家知觉到的馅饼大于卖家知觉到的馅饼，且谈判者知觉到的馅饼在谈判者角色与谈判者绩效间起部分中介作用。实验2发现，即使保留买家与卖家的角色标签，如果剥离了金钱作为交易介质这一重要特征，两个谈判角色知觉到的馅饼也没有差异。研究揭示了谈判者角色影响谈判结果的作用机制，对谈判者如何利用情境因素取得更好的谈判结果具有实践意义。

英文摘要：

In real life, negotiations occur in specific social contexts where negotiators always play certain roles. The current study explored how negotiators＇ roles influence their bargaining outcomes in buy-sell transactions. Based on Neal, Huber, ＆ Northcraft （1987）, we proposed that the buyer-seller role induces framing effect （s）, and that negotiators＇ perceived bargaining pie （or the total value of the resources they are considering） mediates negotiators＇ roles and outcomes. In buy-sell bargaining settings, the buyer＇s role typically induces a loss frame, whereas the seller＇s role evokes a gain frame. Thus, buyers are more risk-seeking than sellers. These dynamics prompt buyers to perceive their pie as larger than sellers＇, and thus the former outperform the latter. Two hundred and four undergraduate students participated in two single-issue buy-sell simulated negotiation exercises. In both experiments, the power of the two parties was set to be equal by manipulating their number of best alternative to negotiated agreement （BATNA）. In experiment 1, we explored how negotiators＇ roles influenced their bargaining outcomes. Eighty-two undergraduate students, i.e., 41 dyads, were randomly designated as buyers or sellers. The item for exchange was an eye-protection lamp. The result of experiment 1 showed that the buyers outperformed the sellers, and that the perceived size of the pie mediated the effect of negotiation role on bargaining performance. Moreover, the communication strategies used by the buyers and the sellers did not contribute to their performance, which means that the behavioral differences among the buyers and the sellers did not account for their contrasting performance. In experiment 2, we explored why negotiators＇ roles influenced negotiators＇ perceived size of the bargaining pie. One hundred and twenty-two participants i.e., 61 dyads, were randomly assigned to the experimental group （20 dyads）, control group 1 （20 dyads）, and control group 2 （21 dyads）, r