This paper argues that in negotiation and other forms of dispute, resolution reasoning may play different roles. Parties, for example, may reason both about what is best for them individualistically and collectively. They may also engage in strategic reasoning, which is different from simple utility maximization. The multiple roles of reasoning in these settings should be appreciated.
Jonathan R. Cohen, Reasoning Along Different Lines: Some Varied Roles of Rationality in Negotiation and Conflict Resolution, 3 Harv. Negot. L. Rev. 111 (1998), available at http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub/440