Use a mediator or neutral frame to bypass reactive devaluation

Floating your idea through a neutral third party — or framing it as your own — makes it more likely to be evaluated fairly.

Why it works

If reactive devaluation causes automatic discounting of counterpart proposals, removing the attribution breaks the mechanism. A mediator who presents a proposal "from the table" removes the adversarial source attribution. Alternatively, you can lead the counterpart to generate the idea themselves (asking questions that converge on it), so they evaluate it as their own.

How to do it

1. If a proposal is stalling due to its source, invite a neutral mediator to restate it as a joint framework.
2. If mediation is unavailable, ask questions that lead the counterpart toward proposing the key terms themselves: "What would you think about something like...?"
3. Acknowledge when you suspect reactive devaluation is operating: "I want to hear this on its own terms — set aside where it came from."

Evidence

Research on mediation effectiveness supports the role of neutral attribution in reducing proposal resistance. The reactive devaluation literature directly suggests the mediation bypass as a corrective. (observational)

Getting a counterpart to generate your preferred idea through questions takes skill and time; the questions must be genuinely open rather than transparently leading.

Sources

• Ross & Stillinger (1991), Negotiation Journal

Common mistake

Pushing harder on a stalled proposal when the resistance is attributional rather than substantive — the issue is source, not content, and additional argument from you makes it worse.