The Role of Argument in Negotiation

Jan Albert van Laar*, Erik C. W. Krabbe

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)
246 Downloads (Pure)


The purpose of this paper is to show the pervasive, though often implicit, role of arguments in negotiation dialogue. This holds even for negotiations that start from a difference of interest such as mere bargaining through offers and counteroffers. But it certainly holds for negotiations that try to settle a difference of opinion on policy issues. It will be demonstrated how a series of offers and counteroffers in a negotiation dialogue contains a reconstructible series of implicit persuasion dialogues. The paper is a sequel to van Laar and Krabbe (2017), in which we showed that for some differences of opinion it may be reasonable to shift from persuasion dialogue, aimed at a resolution of the difference on the merits, to negotiation dialogue, aimed at compromise, whereas in the present paper we show that such a shift need not amount to the abandonment of argumentation. Our main aim in this paper as well as in the previous one is to contribute to the theory of argumentation within the context of negotiation and compromise formation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)549-567
Number of pages19
Issue number4
Early online date24-Apr-2018
Publication statusPublished - Dec-2018


  • Bargaining
  • Compromise
  • Counteroffer
  • Critical reaction
  • Difference of opinion
  • Expediency argument from consequences
  • Negotiation dialogue
  • Offer

Cite this