DMGDemonizing Opponents
Megan over at From the Archives has once again posted something really interesting. It's about long-term negotiations, and why they tend to break down over time. A combination of two factors is involved:
First, humans tend to value losses more than gains, so the things you give up always feel heavier than what you get in return. Making concessions is always more painful than receiving them is gratifying, and so compromise leads us to perceive our opponents as stronger than ourselves.
Second, once we form an idea, we generally perceive confirming evidence, and unconsciously filter everything else. When others base their opinions on the evidence we've discarded, we regard them as exaggerating or lying.
So, over time, both parties to any negotiation come to regard each other as undeservedly powerful liars. Sound familiar?
I think that first part almost hits the mark. Rather than seeing the other side as powerful, I think compromise leads each party to feel they gave up more than they received. Any requests for further compromise are therefore seen as greedy So my formulation would be "...come to regard each other as greedy liars."