Welcome to my mediator’s blog

I will post monthly articles that are short, topical and relevant to dispute resolution generally and to mediation in particular.

Anchoring

AnchoringAn anchoring effect is a cognitive bias which is very important to recognise in negotiation.

This phenomenon involves the tendency to rely heavily on the first piece of information (the “anchor”) presented when making decisions. The first piece of information serves as a reference point, significantly influencing subsequent judgments and decisions. This is even if that first  information is irrelevant or arbitrary.

Understanding how anchoring works in negotiations can give negotiators a crucial advantage, allowing them to either exploit or mitigate the effect depending on the situation.

The Power of the First Offer

At its core, the anchoring effect occurs when the first piece of information presented in a negotiation—such as a price, salary, or deadline—sets the stage for all subsequent discussions. This initial figure, whether it is a high or low offer, tends to anchor the negotiation in ways that subtly influence the parties’ expectations and judgments.

Research in behavioural economics has demonstrated how anchoring affects decision-making. In one well-known study, participants were asked to estimate the percentage of African nations in the United Nations after being exposed to an arbitrary number (e.g., 10 or 65). The results showed that those who saw a higher anchor (65) estimated a much higher percentage than those exposed to the lower anchor (10), despite the number being irrelevant to the task. This illustrates how the first piece of information can distort perceptions and decision-making.

In a negotiation context, the anchoring effect works similarly. If one party makes the first offer, it can set the tone for the entire negotiation. A high anchor, for instance, might nudge the final agreement toward a higher price, even if the opposing party believes the true value is lower. Conversely, a low anchor can drive the outcome downward, potentially leading to a deal that’s more favourable for the party making the offer.

How to Use Anchoring Effectively

For negotiators looking to gain an advantage, using anchoring strategically can lead to more favorable outcomes. The key is to make the first offer, which allows you to set the anchor. By offering a high price or favorable terms, you position the negotiation in your favor. However, it is crucial that your anchor is realistic and based on solid data. An anchor that is too extreme can backfire, making the other party feel manipulated or alienated.

Effective negotiators also understand that anchoring isn’t just about the numbers. Language, tone, and timing are also critical components in setting the anchor. A well-delivered, confident opening statement can have just as much influence as a numerical figure, priming the other party to think in a certain direction.

Mitigating the Anchoring Effect

On the flip side, negotiators who are aware of the anchoring effect can take steps to counter its influence. The most effective way to do this is to remain calm and skeptical when faced with an initial offer. It is essential to resist the temptation to accept the first number presented and to instead reframe the discussion based on the merits of the deal. Asking for more information, challenging assumptions, or simply taking a step back to reassess can help counteract the bias introduced by an anchor.

In addition, research suggests that being aware of anchoring can diminish its impact. By consciously recognizing that the first offer may not reflect the true value, negotiators can recalibrate their expectations and avoid being swayed by irrelevant figures.

Final Thoughts

The anchoring effect is a double-edged sword in negotiation. Mastering its use and defense can significantly enhance your bargaining power and help you achieve more favorable outcomes. Whether you’re haggling over a car, negotiating a business deal, or discussing your salary, anchoring can set the stage for success. By understanding this psychological principle, you’ll be better equipped to make strategic decisions and avoid falling into cognitive traps.

In the world of negotiation, the right anchor can mean the difference between a good deal and a great one.

Creative commons acknowledgment for the photograph.

Paul Cutler is a Sydney based mediator, arbitrator and barrister.

Please get in touch if you would like to discuss your situation or if you want to know my availablity and rates.

Recent posts to my other blogs

A Barrister’s Blog (the lighter side of law)

  • Prosecutor’s Fallacy
    by Paul Cutler on 28 March 2025 at 1:06 am

    The so‑called ‘prosecutor’s fallacy’ describes the risk that the fact finding tribunal will reason that evidence of the match probability or the likelihood ratio expresses the probability that an incriminating DNA sample was the DNA of the accused (Wark v WA [2023] WASCA 66). If you want a more succinct definition (from Xie v R

  • Security Grounds Cancellation
    by Paul Cutler on 9 December 2024 at 5:25 am

    Cancellation of visas on security grounds can raise many complicated issues about review rights and procedural fairness. This can be particularly difficult if the cancellation occurs offshore. The case of Almassri v Minister [2024] FCA 1352 illustrates some of these points. Mrs Almassri is a 69 year old woman from Gaza who has 6 Australian The post Security Grounds Cancellation appeared first on Paul Cutler - Australian Migration Lawyer.

Previous blog posts

The Process of Mediation

The Process of Mediation: An Overview Mediation is a structured, voluntary, and confidential process in which an impartial third party, the mediator (hopefully me), facilitates communication between disputing parties to help them reach a mutually acceptable resolution. The mediation process is flexible and can be adapted to suit the needs of the parties involved, but it generally follows a series of defined steps to ensure effectiveness and fairness. If you undertake mediation training in...

Against Settlement

Against Settlement is the title of a paper written by Owen Fiss, a law professor at Yale which was published in 1984. There is a link to it available on the Yale law school website.  Against Settlement is a paper that I find quite challenging. When I was doing my masters in dispute resolution, it felt like Against Settlement was relevant in almost every subject that I did. So, why did I find it challenging? Most matters settle Despite my chosen career as a litigation lawyer, I actually don't...

BATNA

BATNA is a negotiating term which was coined by  Roger Fisher and William Ury in their book "Getting to Yes," (which I have previously blogged about). What's a BATNA? Let's start with the definition of BATNA. BATNA stands for Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. BATNA is a term,  It is a very important concept in negotiation theory and emphasizes the importance of having a strong, viable alternative when negotiating. There are a number of reasons why understanding your BATNA is very...

Getting to Yes

When I started working as a commercial litigation solicitor in a small firm in 1996, the partner suggested that I read “Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In" by two Harvard academics Roger Fisher and William Ury. It was first published in 1981. Even as a young lawyer I certainly understood the power of negotiation and certainly understood that most litigious matters settle before they are determined by a court. I now know (but probably didn’t fully appreciate at the time)...

The New Lawyer

The New Lawyer

  I thought it was fitting to start my Mediator’s Blog with a few thoughts about about being a new lawyer. Canadian professor Julie Macfarlane's book "The New Lawyer” is one of the many things I read during my dispute resolution studies at UNSW. It has made me think about the future of the legal profession and made me think about how I approach litigation generally. It is one of the things which has prompted me to pursue opportunities as a professional mediator. What is a new lawyer? We...