A survey of 168 management students compared selected negotiation gambits. The results showed that the Expertise and the Reluctant Signer gambits appeared most ethical to the respondents. The Additions and Nibble gambits appeared least ethical. One explanation for the results is how deceptive the gambits might appear to the respondents.

Factor analysis revealed seven factors associated with the seventeen gambits. Most of the factors matched up with prior models of negotiation behavior through Numbers Deception and Information Gathering factors did not.

There are many other variables that might explain differences in the ethical perceptions of each gambit. Demographic results showed that women tended to rate many of the gambits significantly lower than men. Future research can investigate issues such as negotiator experience, the time and money negotiators have to prepare their cases, negotiator biases, and pressures on negotiators from bosses, peers, and friends.