The Interpersonal Effects of Emotions in Negotiations: A Motivated Information Processing Approach (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Interpersonal Effects of Anger and Happiness in Negotiations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2004
Three experiments investigated the interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. In the course of a computer-mediated negotiation, participants received information about the emotional state (anger, happiness, or none) of their opponent. Consistent with a strategic-choice perspective, Experiment 1 showed that participants conceded more to an angry opponent than to a happy one. Experiment 2 showed that this effect was caused by tracking-participants used the emotion information to infer the other's limit, and they adjusted their demands accordingly. However, this effect was absent when the other made large concessions. Experiment 3 examined the interplay between experienced and communicated emotion and showed that angry communications (unlike happy ones) induced fear and thereby mitigated the effect of the opponent's experienced emotion. These results suggest that negotiators are especially influenced by their opponent's emotions when they are motivated and able to consider them.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 2006
This paper focuses on the interactive effects of power and emotion in negotiation. Previous research has shown that negotiators concede more to angry opponents than to happy ones, and that power influences the amount of attention that is devoted to the social environment. Integrating these two lines of inquiry, we predicted that low-power negotiators would be influenced by their opponent's emotions (conceding more to an angry opponent than to a happy one), whereas high-power negotiators would not. Five studies using different methods (an experiment, a field simulation, and three scenario studies), different samples (students, general population, managers), and different operationalisations of power (BATNA, number of alternatives, legitimacy, support) support this hypothesis. The results are discussed in terms of a motivated information processing model of the interpersonal effects of emotions in negotiations.
With Feeling: How Emotions Shape Negotiation
Negotiation Journal
Recognition of the role played by emotions in negotiation is growing. This article synthesizes current research around four broad themes: moves and exchanges, information processing, social interaction, and context. The authors' review reveals that much of the research on this topic has focused on two key emotions, anger and happiness. More recently, negotiators have turned to other emotions such as guilt and disappointment, demonstrating that not all negative emotions have the same consequences, or activate the same regions of the brain. Focusing on social interaction, the authors note that negotiators may influence each others' emotions: whether negotiators converge to anger or happiness has different consequences for agreement. Researchers have broadened their examination of emotion by considering how external factors such as power, the number of negotiators, culture, and gender influence the impact of emotional expression. The authors also consider the function and impac...
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2010
We examine how emotion (anger and happiness) affects value claiming and creation in a dyadic negotiation between parties with unequal power. Using a new statistical technique that analyzes individual data while controlling for dyad-level dependence, we demonstrate that anger is helpful for powerful negotiators. They feel more focused and assertive, and claim more value; the effects are intrapersonal, insofar as the powerful negotiator responds to his or her own emotional state and not to the emotional state of the counterpart. On the other hand, effects of emotion are generally not intrapersonal for lowpower negotiators: these negotiators do not respond to their own emotions but can be affected by those of a powerful counterpart. They lose focus and yield value. Somewhat surprisingly, the presence of anger in the dyad appears to foster greater value creation, particularly when the powerful party is angry. Implications for the negotiation and power literatures are discussed.
The Interpersonal Effects of Anger and Happiness on Negotiation Behavior and Outcomes
IACM 15th Annual Conference, 2003
Abstract: How do emotions affect the opponent's behavior in a negotiation? Two experiments explored the interpersonal effects of anger and happiness. In Study 1 participants received information about the emotion (anger vs. happiness vs. no emotion) of their (fake) opponent. Participants with an angry opponent made lower demands and larger concessions than did participants with a happy opponent, those with a non-emotional opponent falling in between. Furthermore, the opponent's emotions induced similar ...
Journal of Experimental …, 2008
Negotiators often fail to reach integrative ("win-win") agreements because they think that their own and other's preferences are diametrically opposed-the so-called fixed-pie perception. We examined how verbal (Experiment 1) and nonverbal (Experiment 2) emotional expressions may reduce fixed-pie perception and promote integrative behavior. In a two-issue computer-simulated negotiation, participants negotiated with a counterpart emitting one of the following emotional response patterns: (1) anger on both issues, (2) anger on participant's high priority issue and happiness on participant's low-priority issue, (3) happiness on high priority issue and anger on low-priority issue, or (4) happiness on both issues. In both studies, the third pattern reduced fixed-pie perception and increased integrative behavior, whereas the second pattern amplified bias and reduced integrative behavior. Implications for how emotions shape social exchange are discussed.
Get mad and get more than even: When and why anger expression is effective in negotiations
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2006
We hypothesized that anger expressions increase expressers' ability to claim value in negotiations, but only when the recipients of these expressions have poor alternatives. This eVect occurs because anger expression communicates toughness, and only recipients who have poor alternatives are aVected by the toughness of their counterpart. In Experiment 1, participants read a scenario about a negotiator who either was angry or not. In Experiment 2, dyads negotiated face-to-face after one negotiator within each dyad was advised to show either anger or no emotion. In both studies, recipients of anger expressions who had poor alternatives conceded more. Experiment 2 also provided evidence that toughness ascribed to the expresser mediated the eVect of anger expression on claiming value.
Emotions: A Tactical Device in Negotiation Strategy
CHIEF PATRON CHIEF …
Equilibrium is the law of nature and human disposition is no exception to it. Every person attempts to maintain balance in his life but because of the modern life, words like stress and conflict have entered into our daily routine vocabulary. It's a proven fact that conflicts can create turmoil which has a detrimental effect on our physical as well as mental health. Negotiation is one of the most effective defence-mechanism to resolve various conflicts. Negotiation is a composite of cognitive and emotional activity. The negotiators undergo a myriad of experiences and at the same time, face the challenge of keeping one-upmanship. In the process they have to take into account their own preferences and limits while simultaneously trying to monitor and check the opponent's behaviour. Besides this they have to constantly look for loopholes in the opponent's armour. This makes the process all the more complex because the negotiator has to keep on devising changes in the predetermined tactics and the strategy. This study is to identify different approaches which aim at deliberate and target-oriented positioning of the involved parties as well as ascertain the dynamics involved in decision-making process. And how this results in eliciting desired responses. The endeavour is to propose a model that creates the most beneficial outcome without disturbing the equilibrium.
This study presents an emotion-based model of the negotiation process and validates it using data from a dyadic negotiation simulation. We propose that cognitive appraisal of the situation gnerates one of four emotions (pride–achievement, gratitude, guilt–shame, and anger),e depending on the valence and agency of the emotion. We also hypothesize that the effect of negotiator emotion on negotiation behavior is mediated by social motive. Structural equation modeling analyses of the data obtained from 322 participants supported most of the relationships hypothesized in the proposed model. Surprisingly, emotions with the same valence (positive or negative) exhibited contrasting relationships with collaborative and competitive motives, depending on their agency (caused by the self or the other). These findings highlight the importance of considering agency in any examination of the roles of distinct emotions in a negotiation setting. This study also offers a process-based account of how emotion is elicited and how it influences behavior in a negotiation situation.