Tit for Tat is a negotiation style that has several problems. It tends to lock into positive feedback loops (if you’ve ever heard a microphone squeal is it is the classic example of a positive feedback loop) and it suffers from the problem of what has been referred to as negotation asymmetry:
The results revealed an intriguing asymmetry: When volunteers were shown one of their own statements, they naturally remembered what had led them to say it. But when they were shown one of their conversation partner’s statements, they naturally remembered how they had responded to it. In other words, volunteers remembered the causes of their own statements and the consequences of their partner’s statements.
Research teaches us that our reasons and our pains are more palpable, more obvious and real, than are the reasons and pains of others. This leads to the escalation of mutual harm, to the illusion that others are solely responsible for it and to the belief that our actions are justifiable responses to theirs.
Seems pretty obvious if you are familiar with reactive devaluation, but it is one more reason why Tit for Tat fails in the real world.