symmetrical and asymmetrical effects of expressed sadness when

Symmetrical and asymmetrical effects of expressed sadness when negotiate with

person under time pressure

Master Thesis Exposé

Submitted by

Stoyko Stoynov

At University of Kassel

Faculty: International Business Administration

Program: European Master of Business Studies

Kassel, Germany

14.12.2014

Sadness under time pressure 2

CONTENTS

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 3

1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 4

Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 5

2 Negotiation: Definition, characteristics, and factors influencing the results .................... 5

2.1 Definition and characteristics ................................................................................... 5

2.2 Factors influencing the process and the results......................................................... 5

2.2.1 Interdependence ................................................................................................ 5

2.2.2 Trust and relationship ....................................................................................... 7

2.2.3 Culture .............................................................................................................. 7

2.2.4 Negotiation style ............................................................................................... 8

2.3 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 9

3 Emotions: Definition, characteristics, and emotions as process and as categories ......... 14

3.1 Definition and characteristics ................................................................................. 14

3.2 Emotions as categories ........................................................................................... 14

3.3 Emotions as process ................................................................................................ 15

3.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 15

4 Emotions in negotiations ................................................................................................ 21

4.1 Emotions as social information (EASI) theory ....................................................... 21

4.1.1 Affective reactions .......................................................................................... 21

4.1.2 Inferential processes ....................................................................................... 22

4.1.3 Information processing ................................................................................... 22

4.1.4 Perceived appropriateness and social context ................................................. 22

4.2 Symmetrical and Asymmetrical model ................................................................... 23

4.2.1 EASI perspective ............................................................................................ 23

4.2.2 Evidences for symmetrical effects and asymmetrical effects ......................... 24

5 Propositions (Hypothesis) ............................................................................................... 29

6 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 31

7 Structure of the thesis ..................................................................................................... 32

8 Time schedule ................................................................................................................. 33

9 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 34


ABSTRACT

In this study I investigate the effects of sadness expression in negotiations in order to

find out if there are symmetrical and asymmetrical effects when the observer is under

time pressure. An experiment of face to face negotiations with students was conducted.

There were three variations of the negotiations task that were handed out to the

participants: sadness manipulation, time pressure manipulation, and neutral to both

emotions and time. I expect that sadness expression would help in situation in which

the counterpart is not influenced by the time and will have negative reactions if the

other party is under time pressure. If the hypothesis turn out to be true then there is

evidence for symmetrical and asymmetrical effects of sadness expression in

negotiation.

Keywords: sadness, time pressure, negotiation, emotion and negotiation, Emotions as

Social Information (EASI) theory, interpersonal effects of emotions


1 INTRODUCTION

Both expressing emotions and negotiations are part of the everyday life of the human

beings. Moreover, these two processes are interrelated. For instance, the negotiation

over the time when the rooms should be cleaned between the parents and the children

might evoke anger in the former and might upset the later. Furthermore, the emotions

and their interpersonal effect could be used strategically of both the parents and the

children to influence the outcome of the negotiations (Van Kleef, De Dreu, &

Manstead, 2004b, p. 511 b). However, the success depends on the situation (Van Kleef

& Côté, 2007, p. 1558). For example, if there are the new neighbors coming for a lunch

one day and for the children there is just an ordinary meeting with friends than the

anger of the parents will prevail because it is more appropriate. In contrast, if it is the

biggest pool party this day and for the parents it is just a day off work then the sadness

will provide the children with a postponement. In the recent years the interest in

studying those interpersonal effects of emotions has been growing. Most of the studies

focused on examining the effects of anger and happiness using the information van

Kleef (2009; 2014) built up a model which posits that there are both symmetrical and

asymmetrical effects of the expressed emotions. These effects are driven by affective

reactions or/and inferential process which in turn are influenced by the information

processing depth and the perceived appropriateness (Van Kleef, 2014, p. 1158). On

the other hand, the emotions like sadness and their interpersonal effects in negotiations

have not attracted much attention but only one study conducted by Sinaceur,

Kopelman, Vasiljevic, and Haag (2014). The results show that sadness could be

successful strategy when the expresser is perceived as low-power, when a future

interaction is anticipated, and when to blame the others is inappropriate. However,

there is still a gap which needs to be filled in order to integrate the dimension of sadness

into the EASI model. This paper’s goal is to fill in the gap by conducting one

experiments of face-to-face negotiation. It will research if observers under high time

pressure neglect the sadness of the other party. Combining the outcomes of the

experiment in this paper and the ones performed by Sinaceur et al. (2014) will provide

me with enough evidence that there is symmetrical and asymmetrical effects of

expressed sadness in negotiations as a result a new dimension could be added in van

Kleef’s model (2014, p. 1157).


LITERATURE REVIEW

2 NEGOTIATION: DEFINITION, CHARACTERISTICS, AND FACTORS INFLUENCING

THE RESULTS

2.1 DEFINITION AND CHARACTERISTICS

Negotiation is a process which occurs “when persons or parties pursue different

interests and communicate with each other to reach an agreement” (Opresnik, 2014, p.

1). There are several characteristics that are common for every negotiation process.

First of all, the parties involved must be at least two or more. Secondly, there must be

interdependence between the parties. Moreover, the power of the participants must be

more or less equal. Furthermore, there must be “a conflict of interest”. In addition,

both parties must be ready to concede from their demands. Last but not the least, the

final goal of the process must be achieving an agreement.(Lewicki, Saunders, &

Minton, 1999, p. 6; Opresnik, 2014, p. 2)

2.2 FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PROCESS AND THE RESULTS

2.2.1 Interdependence

Two parties are interdependent when they rely on each other to reach their goals. The

issues the parties negotiate could be distributive (fixed-pie) or integrative also known

as zero-sum and non-zero-sum situations (Lewicki, Saunders, & Barry, 2011, p. 10;

Lewicki et al., 1999, p. 8; Thompson, 2009, p. 3).

In the fixed-pie situation the gains for one of the parties means losses for the other

because they are negotiating over a limited resources. However, also in these situations

an agreement could be reached because the parties have different preferred prices

(target points) and bottom lines (resistance points). The spread between the latter is

called zone of possible agreement (ZOPA). When the buyer’s resistance point is lower

than the seller’s one there is positive ZOPA and in the reverse situation there is

negative ZOPA. In order to reach an agreement the ZOPA must be positive and since

the parties do not reveal their resistance points in the beginning of the negotiations in

the case of negative ZOPA they have to change them if they want to seal the deal


(Lewicki et al., 2011, pp. 29–31, 1999, pp. 70–74; Thompson, 2009, pp. 41–44).

According to Thompson “The best possible economic outcome for the negotiator is

one that just meets the counterparty’s reservation point, thereby inducing the other

party to agree, but allows the focal negotiator to reap as much gain as possible.” (2009,

p. 43). Roger Fisher and William Fury developed a concept called “best alternative to

a negotiated agreement (BATNA)” (1991, pp. 101–111) which helps to gain more out

of distributive negotiations. First of all, having a BATNA helps for determining the

reservation point of a negotiator, though, it is not a static value. Furthermore, one could

use the BATNA to manipulate the reservation point of the counter party. Moreover, if

one knows that his BATNA is better than the counterparty’s he will be able to gain

more concessions in the process and achieve better result (Lewicki et al., 2011, pp.

29–34, 1999, pp. 70–78; Thompson, 2009, pp. 44–51).

On the other hand, the integrative situations occur when the goals of the parties

involved in negotiations are not mutually exclusive. These win-win situations exist in

almost every negotiation, however, due to failure to exchange enough information,

failure to understand other’s needs and lack of flexibility in finding common solutions

people are unable to identify these possibilities. Leigh Thompson posits nine strategies

that helps negotiators to find integrative solutions. In the first place negotiators are

more successful in expanding the pie when they take the prospective of the other side.

Furthermore, people should ask questions about the interest and preferences of the

counterparty because it is a way to understand what is valuable for the others.

However, it is also important not only to ask questions but also to provide information

about one’s priorities. Besides negotiators should try to divide a complex issue into

several smaller in order to satisfy different preferences. However, these issues should

be negotiated in package and several offers of equal value should be made

simultaneously. Another prerequisite for reaching integrative negotiation is to discuss

the differences instead of ignoring them as a result those difference could be

capitalized on different strengths of preference. The two last strategies proposed by

Thomson are related to presettlement (PreSS) and postsettlement settlements. The

former could be used to establish framework for the final negotiations or to resolve

subset of the issues. In contrast with the postsettlement the parties agree on attempting

to improve the signed agreement with another preferred more from both (2009, pp.

81–93; See also: Lewicki et al., 2011, pp. 62–87, 1999, pp. 107–138;).


2.2.2 Trust and relationship

The results of a negotiation are influenced by the trust and the relationship between

the parties engaged in the process. Establishing trust is very essential for reaching a

final agreement. The trust in a relationship is based on behavioral consistency,

knowledge about the counterpart, and empathy with the other’s desires and intentions.

The first strategy to be developed is through rational and deliberate mechanisms. This

includes separating people from the problem, consent on common goals and vision,

concentrate on the future. On the other hand, there are psychological strategies such as

find similarities, multiple meetings, reciprocity, schmoozing, flattery and self-

disclosure which are increasing the trust in people. The last but not the least important

factor is the reputation of the negotiators. To build up strong one people should know

that the process of forming impressions is often automatic and is based on limited

information resulting either in halo effect (positive impression) or forked-tail effect

(negative impression). In addition, people’s reputation is not only based on other’s

impression about us (firsthand) but also on secondhand information received from

someone else. (Fisher & Ury, 1991, pp. 17–40; Luecke, 2003, pp. 109–119;

Thompson, 2009, pp. 128–158)

2.2.3 Culture

Culture is playing great role in negotiation process. The challenges that people

encounter when they are involved in international negotiations are indeed very

significant even the definition of the process itself could differ across cultures. For

example, Americans understand negotiations like competitive process while the

Japanese see them as opportunity. There are also cultural differences related to the

selection of the negotiators because across cultures the criteria knowledge, matter of

negotiation, gender, age, experience, and status have different importance. Another

distinction between the cultures is the formality of the process. For instance the

Americans are rarely stick to the protocol while cultures as French, German, and

British are very strict about the rules. Next important factor is how the cultures

perceive time. People in the United States have high sensitivity and they appear on

time for the appointments and try to finish as early as possible. In contrast, in countries

such as Latin American ones where the climate is warmer the people do not pay that

much attention on time but on the task they are doing. As a result of the different


perception the Americans might see the others as time wasters while in contrary they

could be perceived as not paying attention to the negotiations. Moreover, some cultures

are more risk aversive and they try to seek for more information before taking

decisions resulting in an increase of the duration of the negotiations. Furthermore,

some cultures are group-oriented as Chinese while others such as Americans have

more individualistic approach. This could have various effects on the negotiations such

as slow decision-taking process, starting over the negotiations due to change of the

counterparty’s negotiator. Another milestone in international negotiations is the nature

of agreement. In some cultures such as the American the final agreement is formalized

and based on the legal system. On the other hand, in China people will often sign a

memorandums of agreement before starting the real negotiations which is mistaken by

the Americans as a final agreement. Last but not the least, is the difference in the

emotionalism across cultures. There are evidences that there are rules in a culture

which govern the expression of emotions.

Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry suggested different strategies to cope with the culture in

international negotiations according to the level of familiarity. In the case of low

familiarity they advise to hire agent, advisor or mediator who is familiar with both

cultures. When the negotiators have moderate familiarity the authors suggest to adopt

some of the other’s behavior or to coordinate the behavior of both sides either

implicitly or explicitly and to establish a common ground. Negotiators with high

familiarity should use completely the other’s approach, create together with the other

party a new way to negotiate or to adopt the approach of a third culture if both parties

are familiar with it (Lewicki, Saunders, & Barry, 2010, pp. 342–356; Lewicki et al.,

2011, pp. 230–250, 1999, pp. 379–406; Thompson, 2009, pp. 258–291).

2.2.4 Negotiation style

Although in theory there are 8 types of negotiation styles only three of them are

frequently used. First of all is the individualistic style where the final goal is to

maximize the benefit while being indifferent about the value for the other. The other

two are the competitive and cooperative ones. With the former people aim to maximize

the difference in the profit between the parties, while negotiators using cooperative

style prefer to reach equality (Thompson, 2009, pp. 96–105) Another theory by Ury,

Brett, and Goldberg cited by Thompson posits that in negotiations people use one of


three approaches based on interests, rights, and power. The ones that apply the interest

approach try to understand the other’s needs, desires and concerns. On the other hand,

negotiators emphasizing on rights attempt to establish fairness in the process by using

contracts, norms, rules, etc. Finally the one that rely on power use professional status,

hierarchical position, ultimatums, and intimidation techniques (Thompson, 2009, pp.

105–106). An investigation conducted by Lytle, Brett, and Shapiro showed that

negotiators change their approach several times during the process. In the first and

third part of the negotiations the participants used more rights and power compared to

the second and fourth quarters. In addition, the results showed that the participants

reciprocate the other’s behavior but with different rates as follows interests (42%),

power (27%), and rights (22%) (1999, pp. 31–49).

On the other hand, the negotiation style is influenced by the emotions and emotional

knowledge of the participants. Moreover, the one’s emotions has intrapersonal and

interpersonal effects. Both could be used as strategic tool to gain edge in the

negotiations or they could be just natural expressions of the feelings (Lewicki et al.,

2011, pp. 129–133; Opresnik, 2014, pp. 33–40; Thompson, 2009, pp. 119–127). More

about the emotions and the effects they have in the negotiations will be presented in

the next parts of the paper.

2.3 CONCLUSION

Negotiations are very complex process and involves at least two parties which are

interdependent and as a result to achieve their goals they need to reach an agreement.

The success in the process depends on factors such as ZOPA, BATNA, trust and

relationship, culture and negotiations style of the participants. In order to be successful

negotiator one has to have knowledge how to use the factors to be able to avoid the

milestones in the negotiations.

Title Authors Journal,

Book,

etc.

Content

Getting to yes

2nd ed.

(Fisher & Ury,

1991)

Book Method for successful negotiation

was developed. It includes 4

elements:


1.Separate the people from the

problem

2.Focus on interests, not positions

3.Invent options for mutual gain

4.Insist on using objective criteria

Negotiation 6th

ed.

(Lewicki,

Barry, &

Saunders,

2010a)

Book 1.Negotiation fundamentals

a. The nature of negotiation – list

of the characteristics,

interdependence, value claiming,

value creation, conflict

b. Strategy and tactics of

distributive bargaining –

BATNA, fundamental strategies,

tactical tasks, positions, concession,

commitment, closing the deal,

c. Strategy and tactics of

integrative negotiation – the

process, key steps, alternative

solutions, factors for success,

d. Negotiation: Strategy and

Planning – stages and phases,

analyzing the other party

2.Negotiation Sub processes

a. Perception, cognition, and

emotion – perception, framing,

cognition biases, positive and

negative emotions


Negotiation

readings,

exercises and

Cases 6th ed.

(Lewicki,

Saunders, &

Barry, 2010b)

Book 1.Negotiation Fundamentals

a. Three approaches to resolve

disputes: Interest, rights, and

power – relation between them,

cost, and choosing the best

approach in the situation

b. Selecting a strategy – There are

4 strategies, namely avoiding

(Lose-Lose), competitive (Win-

Lose), accommodating (Lose-Win),

collaborative (Win-Win). Choosing

the strategy should depend on the

situation and the preferences of the

negotiators.

c. Balancing act: How to manage

negotiation tensions – The author

presents top 10 list of bargaining

techniques that could help during

tough negotiations. Negotiation

checklist before starting the

negotiations.

d. Effective negotiating

techniques: From selecting

strategies to side-stepping

impasses and assumptions – A list

and explanation of effective

techniques,

e. Closing your business

negotiations - A list of Do’s and

Don’ts

f. Defusing the exploding offer:

The far point gambit- the five

characteristics of exploding offer,


explain the technique called far

point gambit

g. Implementing a collaborative

strategy – characteristics, steps and

success in the collaborative

strategies

h. Solve joint problems to create

and claim value

i. Even in megastores, hagglers

find no price is set in stone

2.Negotiation sub processes

a. Negotiating rationally: The

power and impact of the

negotiator’s frame

a. Managers and their not so

rational decisions – biases

affecting manager’s decisions

b. When your thoughts work

against you – A list of five

mistakes that managers make and

possible solutions to avoid them

c. Untapped power: Emotions in

negotiations – hints how the use of

emotions could help in the

negotiations

d. Where does power come from

– Personal attributes, structural

forces, the fit between situational

requirements and personal traits

e. Harnessing the power of

persuasion - presenting 6

fundamental principles of

persuasion

f. The six channels of persuasion


Negotiation

theory and

research

(Thompson,

2006)

Book Bargaining with feeling:

emotionality in and around

negotiation – defining emotion,

affect in negotiation, predictions of

and predicting affect, tactical use of

emotion, intraindividual emotion,

emotion expression and regulation

The Hand

Book of

Negotiation

and Culture

(Gelfand &

Brett, 2004)

Book 1. The evolution of cognition and

biases in negotiation research –

prospect theory and BDT, and

information processing, self-

perception biases, emotional biases,

consequences of affect, emotional

biases

2. “I Laughed, I cried, I settled”

The role of emotion in

negotiation – definitions,

theoretical research, emotion as

predictor, emotion as an outcome,

emotion as tactic


3 EMOTIONS: DEFINITION, CHARACTERISTICS, AND EMOTIONS AS PROCESS AND

AS CATEGORIES

3.1 DEFINITION AND CHARACTERISTICS

Consequently, to the fact that researchers from different fields such as physiology,

sociology, psychology, neuroscience, and biology study emotions and their effects,

there are many definitions of the term but neither is undisputable. In psychologist’s

point of you emotions are based on the structure of the individual, information flows,

and the dynamic interaction with the environment. Moreover, it is clear that there are

processes previous to the emotions such as appraisal (Frijda, 2008, p. 70). The latter is

defined as internal process of the mind that transform the events happening in the

environment into affective and meaningful ones for the wellbeing (Lazarus, 1991, pp.

133–144). In addition, the appraisal processes differ in complexity from being

automatic to highly cognitive ones (Frijda, 2007, pp. 96–106). Frijda goes deeper and

suggests that there are three intermediaries between the appraisal process and the

behavior (emotion), namely action readiness, affect, and arousal (2007, p. 20). First of

all he posits that emotions are states initiated by external events or objects of action

readiness which are rank according to the importance to the individual (Frijda, 2007,

pp. 25–33). The term “readiness” stands for “being set for action if and when

appropriate conditions arise, and if relevant actions are available in one’s action

repertoire” (Frijda, 2008, p. 72). The second mediator affects is considered by Frijda

as both pleasure and pain (displeasure). According to him the affect is evanescent,

subjective, evaluative, and intentional (2007, pp. 63–66).

3.2 EMOTIONS AS CATEGORIES

Lazarus treat emotions as discrete categories (1991, p. 59). He considers them as

“families of emotions that share a common core relational theme”. Moreover, he posits

that every category could be dimensionalized according to their strength (Lazarus,

1991, p. 68). Although, he agrees with the cluster analysis made by Shaver, Schwartz,

Kirson and O’Connor in which they distinguish six categories of the basic emotions,

namely love, joy, surprise, anger, sadness, and fear, Lazarus states that using only one

word to describe a category brings ambiguity (Lazarus, 1991, p. 68). In order to cope


with the issue he suggests to use sentences instead of words to represent the core

relational theme. For instance, anger would be “A demeaning offence against me and

mine”, happiness is “Making reasonable progress towards realization of a goal”, and

“Having experience an irrevocable loss” is used core of sadness (Lazarus, 1991, pp.

121–126). However, in the recent years the multicomponential and hierarchical

approaches change the understanding of emotion categories into process

conceptualizations. As a result more detailed analysis could be performed on the

components of emotions which will eventually lead to better understanding (Frijda,

2008, p. 77).

3.3 EMOTIONS AS PROCESS

According to the multicomponential emotion theory emotions are “streams of

concurrent and interacting ongoing processes: appraisals that last and change, that

activate processes of action readiness that generate action preparations and overt

actions, which in turn act back upon appraisals and that all vary in degree of activation,

each having different time courses and different moments at which they die down”

(Scherer, 2000 cited by Frijda, 2008, p. 74). In addition, all of the processes could be

evaluated according to their intensity but as the other elements strength is “highly

context sensitive” and could not be defined (Frijda, 2007, p. 155). Furthermore,

emotions often appear in “emotion episodes” which are spread out over time and

contain several emotions. The duration of an episode could range from a few seconds

to hours and days and even for lifetime if sentiments are considered as emotions

(Frijda, 2008, pp. 74–75; Lazarus, 1991, p. 62).

3.4 CONCLUSION

There are many more opinions and views on what emotions are than the one presented

above but neither has given undisputable explanation. Moreover the difficulty of

giving legitimate definitions derive from the disputes over the origin, the function and

the factors influencing the emotions such as experience and motivation. Probably

researchers with complex knowledge in different fields would be able to answer some

of the questions regarding the emotions.



Book, etc.

Content

Social

functions of

emotions at

four level of

analysis

(Keltner &

Haidt, 1999)

Cognition &

emotion

The four levels: individual,

dyadic, group, and cultural

levels of analysis, social

functions of emotions,

embarrassment case.

Facial

expressions

allow

inference of

both emotions

and

components

(Scherer &

Grandjean,

2008)

Cognition &

emotion

The experiment proves that for

sadness that the message

A model of the

perception of

facial

expressions of

emotion by

humans:

Research

overview and

perspectives

(Martinez &

Du, 2012)

Journal of

Machine

Learning

Research

The author, presents new model

for more accurate “detection” of

the facial expressions. There is

overview of the literature to

justify the model.

On the social

influence of

emotions in

groups: inter

personal

effects of anger

and happiness

on conformity

versus

deviance

(Heerdink,

Van Kleef,

Homan, &

Fischer, 2013)

Journal of

personality

and social

psychology

The way an expression of anger

or happiness reflects on a

perceiver who deviates a

suggestion within the group,

deviance vs. conformity,

influencing the cooperation

within the group


Developmental

relations

between

sympathy,

moral

emotions,

attributes,

moral

reasoning, and

social justice

values from

childhood to

early

adolescence

(Daniel, Dys,

Buchmann, &

Malti, 2014)

Journal of

adolescence

The study was conducted

among 6, 9 and 12 years old

children. It shows that

sympathy, predict moral

emotion attributions, which

predicts moral reasoning.

How group-

based

emotions are

shaped by

collective

emotions:

Evidence for

emotional

transfer and

emotion

burden

(Goldenberg,

Saguy, &

Halperin,

2014)

Journal of

personality

and social

psychology

Intergroup processes are

determine by the collective

emotion in the group. However,

there might be still some

individual emotions which

differ from the collective ones.

This difference brings

nonconformity to the member

of the group.

Emotion,

regulation, and

moral

development

(Eisenberg,

2000)

Annual review

of psychology

Relations of nonmoral emotions

to moral relevant behavior


In search for

“hot”

cognitions:

Attributes,

appraisals, and

their relation to

emotion

(Smith,

Haynes,

Lazarus, &

Pope, 1993)

Journal of

personality

and social

psychology

Two experiments were

conducted which revealed that

appraisal serves as mediator

between attribution and

emotional response

How emotions

regulate social

life: The

emotions as

social

information

(EASI) model

(Van Kleef,

2009)

Current

directions in

psychological

science

Explained after the table

Criteria for

emotion

recognition

from verbal

and nonverbal

expression:

Studying

baggage loss in

the airport

(Scherer &

Ceschi, 2000)

Personality

and social

psychology

bulletin

The research displays that the

verbal reports in a public

situation are regulated, however

nonverbal cues are mediating

the recognition of the emotion.

Voices of fear

and anxiety

and sadness

and depression

(Siegman &

Boyle, 1993)

Journal of

abnormal

psychology

The mood-congruent voice style

for sadness or depression is

slow and soft.

What do facial

expression

convey:

Feeling states,

behavioral

intentions or

(Horstmann,

2003)

Emotion The results of the study support

that facial expressions

communicate emotions (feeling

states in the case of sadness)


action

requests?

How and when

does emotional

expression

help?

(Kennedy-

Moore &

Watson,

2001)

Review of

general

psychology

3 possible mechanisms by

which expression might release

distress: reducing distress about

distress, facilitating insight, and

affecting interpersonal

relationships in a desired way.

Motivated

closing of the

mind:

“Seizing” and

“Freezing”

(Kruglanski &

Webster,

1996)

Psychological

review

Motivated need for closure

Freeze – to preserve closure

Seize – to desire closure

immediately

Making sense

of the social

world and

influencing it

by using a

naïve

attribution

theory of

emotions

(Hareli, 2014) Emotion

review

The author gives better

understanding for the way the

inferential process work during

the social interaction between

people. He also suggests that

there are processes which allow

one to react of the expressed

emotions without necessary

through inferential process but

by automatically triggering

associations to the emotions.

Emotional

influence at

work: Take it

EASI

(Van Kleef,

Homan, &

Cheshin,

2012)

Organizational

Psychological

Review

Explaining the EASI theory in

details and drawing a number of

prepositions which has to be

tested with further research.


Power,

distress, and

compassion

turning a blind

eye to the

suffering of

others

(Van Kleef et

al., 2008)

Psychological

science

The researchers study how

people with relevantly high

social power reacts to the

suffering of the others. The

results show that high power

people appear less motivated to

respond to others emotions.

The laws of

emotion

(Frijda, 2007) Book Contains 9 laws and the

principles they work.

Emotion &

adaptation

(Lazarus,

1991)

Book 1. Emotion as a process

2. Emotion as categories or

dimensions

3. Negative emotions

Handbook of

emotions

(Lewis,

Haviland-

Jones, &

Barret, 2008)

Book 1. Vocal expression of emotion

2. Facial expression of emotion

3. The role of motion in

economic behavior

4. Social functions of emotion


4 EMOTIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS

4.1 EMOTIONS AS SOCIAL INFORMATION (EASI) THEORY

In contrast to the appraisal and attribution theories which are focused on the

antecedents, the EASI is centered on the consequences of the emotional expressions

(Van Kleef, 2014, p. 1148). Based on the social-functional approach to emotion

(Lazarus, 1991, p. 412; Lewis et al., 2008, p. 456) and adding two processes: affective

reaction and inferential processes, this model (see Figure 1) posits that by expressing

emotions one could influence the behavior of the observer through two types of

processes: affective reactions and inferences.(see Figure 1, van Kleef, 2009, p. 184).

4.1.1 Affective reactions

There are two types of affective reaction. The first is created by emotional contagion

where the emotions of the perceiver becomes reciprocal to the ones of the expresser

(Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1993, p. 97). In series of investigations van Kleef et

al. proved that negotiators who faced angry opponent felt angry as well, while on the

contrary, those who were negotiating with happy counterpart experienced happiness

(2004a, p. 71; 2004b, p. 523).The second type of affective reactions take place when

the expressed emotions evoke complementary emotions in the perceiver’s behavior

(Van Kleef et al., 2008, p. 1315). For example, negotiator is concern and feels

compassion if the other is sad and is perceived as powerless (Sinaceur et al., 2014, p.

45; Van Kleef et al., 2008, p. 1320). As a result of the expressed emotions the

observer’s behavior is influenced through “affect infusion” (Forgas, 1995, p. 60).

Figure 1. The emotion as social information model (Van Kleef, 2009, p. 185)


4.1.2 Inferential processes

In general, inferences could be made by the perceivers about the feelings, attitudes,

relational orientation, and behavior intention of the expressers (Keltner & Haidt, 1999,

p. 516). As a result of the easily distinguishable features (vocal, facial, behavioral, etc.)

a lot of information is transferred to the observers (Hareli & Hess, 2010, pp. 138–139).

Consequently, in negotiations one might infer that the other is angry because of the

offers made until now and this inference might lead to further compromises (Van

Kleef, 2014, p. 1149). However, the predictive power of the information processing

depends on the individual’s information processing and the appropriateness of the

situation (Van Kleef et al., 2012, p. 316; Van Kleef, 2009, p. 186).

4.1.3 Information processing

The relation between anticipation ability of one’s inferences and information

processing is positive. Meaning that in order to achieve more accurate inferential

process the epistemic motivation for decoding the expressed emotions has to be high

(Van Kleef et al., 2004b, p. 523, 2012, p. 186). Supporting these statements are the

results of several experiments conducted by Van Kleef and Oveis who found out that

negotiators which are not under time pressure, had low power, or low need for

cognitive closure make higher concessions to angry participants because the former

infer that their offers are the reason for the expresser’s emotions (2008, p. 1320).

Another evidence are brought by Sinaceur et al.’s investigation in which the

negotiators which counterparts were sad compromised when a future interaction was

anticipated and less when it was known for sure it was on time negotiation (2014, p.

45).

4.1.4 Perceived appropriateness and social context

The power of the inferences and affective reactions is influenced by the social context

and perceived appropriateness (Van Kleef et al., 2012, p. 316). According to Shields

inappropriate situations considered to be one contradicting the normative expectations

(Shields, 2005, pp. 12–13; see also Van Kleef & Côté, 2007, p. 1566). Showing

emotions which are comprehended as inappropriate for the situation brings negative

emotions in observers (Bucy, 2000, p. 194). There are several factors which defines if


expressing emotions is relevant for the situation. First of all the variation in culture

could alter the perception of the expressed emotions (Van Kleef et al., 2012, p. 317).

There are evidences that in individualistic societies showing anger is considered as

acceptable compared to collectivistic ones where it is extremely inappropriate

(Kitayama, Mesquita, & Karasawa, 2006, p. 900). Furthermore, the perceived

appropriateness rely on the intensity and authenticity of the displayed emotions (Van

Kleef et al., 2012, p. 317). An investigation showed that intense anger is comprehended

as unfitting resulting in negative reactions (Geddes & Callister, 2007, pp. 729–738).

Another study proved that faked emotions are considered to be used as a strategy to

gain edge in the negotiations which results in negative affective responses and in

competitive behavior (Côté, Hideg, & Van Kleef, 2013, pp. 461–462; Van Kleef et al.,

2012, p. 318; Van Kleef, 2014, p. 1150). Other factors influencing the appropriateness

of the situation are personality traits and status (Van Kleef et al., 2012, p. 318). For

instance harmony oriented individuals become hostile towards angry expressers

(Graziano, Jensen-Campbell, & Hair, 1996, pp. 831–833). Moreover, if the latter is

perceived with lower-status or with equal status compared to the observer it will elicit

negative response because it is perceived as not relevant to show anger against peers

(Porath, Overbeck, & Pearson, 2008, pp. 1968–1970). Furthermore, in another

investigation Sinaceur et al. came up with the results that the positive effects of

expressing sadness outstrip the ones of anger when it was considered as not appropriate

to blame the other (Sinaceur et al., 2014, p. 45).

4.2 SYMMETRICAL AND ASYMMETRICAL MODEL

4.2.1 EASI perspective

There are three key EASI prepositions that refers to symmetrical and asymmetrical

emotion effects (See Table 1, Van Kleef, 2014, p. 1151). According to the EASI theory

the symmetrical/asymmetrical outcomes of the expressed emotions depends on the

discussed above “thorough information processing” and “perceived appropriateness”.

In this train of thoughts, asymmetrical effect would be noticed if the observer has

higher epistemic motivation to infer the expressed anger. However, if the situation is

perceived as inappropriate then it will elicit negative reaction (symmetrical effect). On

the other hand, in the situation of expressed happiness symmetrical traits would be

noticed when inferential process is weak and asymmetrical when the situation is

perceived as not relevant to be happy. Moreover, the same features could be notice

when negotiators express sadness (Sinaceur et al., 2014, pp. 45–46).


Proposition 1 Emotional expressions shape the

judgments, decisions and actions of

those who perceive them by triggering

affective reactions and/or inferential

processes in the perceivers.

Proposition 2 Perceivers’ responses to others’

emotional expressions are more likely to

be driven by inferential processes

(relative to affective reactions) to the

degree that perceivers engage in more

thorough information processing.

Proposition 3 Perceivers’ responses to others’

emotional expressions are more likely to

be driven by negative affective reactions

(relative to inferential processes) to the

degree that perceivers view the

emotional expressions as inappropriate.

4.2.2 Evidences for symmetrical effects and asymmetrical effects

In two separate studies conducted by Van Kleef et al. (2004a), and Sinaceur and

Tiedens (2006) was found that inferential processes influence the interpersonal effects

of anger and happiness. In the first one the observers conceded more to angry

counterparts compared to happy ones because they perceived the former’s limit to be

high. In the second investigation angry expressers were perceived to be tougher than

neutral ones. In addition, it was proven that relation between the negotiation power of

the participants has reciprocal relationship with their epistemic motivation meaning

that the latter is higher for low-power negotiators compared to high-power ones (Van

Kleef & Côté, 2007, p. 1566; Van Kleef et al., 2008, p. 1320; Van Kleef, De Dreu,

Pietroni, & Manstead, 2006, p. 577).

Table 2. Key propositions of EASI theory that inform an analysis of symmetrical

versus asymmetrical interpersonal effects of emotional expressions in organizations

(Van Kleef, 2014, p. 1152)



Book, etc.

Content

Understanding

the positive and

negative effects

of emotional

expressions in

organizations:

EASI does it

(Van Kleef,

2014)

Human

Relations

Complete literature review on the

topic and building up model of

the way the expression of anger

and happiness works in

negotiation.

Weep and get

more: When

and why

sadness

expression is

effective in

negotiations

(Sinaceur et

al., 2014)

Journal of

Applied

Psychology

The first research dedicated to

how the expression of sadness in

negotiation influences the

outcomes.

Figure 3. Theoretical model for analysing the (a)symmetrical effects of expressed

emotions (Van Kleef, 2014, p. 1157)


Power and

emotion in

negotiation:

Power

moderates the

interpersonal

effects of anger

and happiness

on concession

making

(Van Kleef,

De Dreu,

Pietroni, et

al., 2006)

European

Journal of

Social

Psychology

5 experiments were conducted

and it was proven that negotiators

with higher bargaining power

(HPN) are less influenced by

emotions while those with less

(LPN) are affected. Moreover,

when the other party express

anger then the LPN made higher

concession compared with when

happiness was expressed.

The

interpersonal

effects of anger

and happiness

in negotiations

(Van Kleef et

al., 2004a a)

Journal of

Personality

and Social

Psychology

3 experiments were conducted

and it was proven that anger leads

to lower demands and higher

concessions whereas happiness

leads to higher demands and

lower concessions. The effect is

mitigated if the opponent

undermines the motivation to

take his emotions into

consideration. In addition it was

proven that the effect is removed

when the opponent sends angry

messages.

The

interpersonal

effects of

emotions in

negotiations: A

motivated

information

process

approach

(van Kleef et

al., 2004b)

Journal of

Personality

and Social

Psychology

The paper shows that a negotiator

is affected by the expressed

emotions of the counter party

only when he is motivated to

consider them. For instance,

when there is low time pressure

or low power. The contrary is

also valid as people who are

under high time pressure and

have high bargaining power


which results in reduced

information processing.

Supplication

and

appeasement in

conflict and

negotiation:

The

interpersonal

effects of

disappointment,

worry, guilt,

and regret

(Van Kleef,

De Dreu, &

Manstead,

2006)

Journal of

Personality

and Social

Psychology

The paper includes 3 experiments

which prove that expressing guilt,

shame and embarrassment

(appeasement) increase the

demand and decrease the

concession in negotiations. While

emotions such as sadness,

disappointment, fear, and worry

(supplication) has the reverse

effect for both demand and

concessions.

Expressing

anger in

conflict: When

it helps and

when it hurts.

(Van Kleef &

Côté, 2007)

The Journal

of Applied

Psychology

The researchers adopted a dual

model where the emotion of

anger (appropriate, inappropriate,

no emotion) is crossed with the

power of the other party (high or

low power).


Longer-term

consequences

of anger

expression in

negotiation:

Retaliation of

spillover?

(Van Kleef &

De Dreu,

2010)

Journal of

Experimental

Social

Psychology

The researchers studied the effect

of anger in long-term.

Conducting 2 experiments they

discovered that the expression of

anger has so called spillover

effect and influence the future

negotiation. As a result the

counter party makes concessions

as they perceive the expresser as

though and more ambitious. On

the other hand, the researchers

proved that if party apologies for

previous angry behavior then the

other develops favorable

impressions and are willing to

engage In future negotiations.

Get mad and get

more

(Sinaceur &

Tiedens,

2006)

Journal of

Experimental

Social

Psychology

The two experiments verified that

expressing anger works in a

positive way when the other

participant in the negotiations

consider his other options as

poor.

Are you talking

to me?!

Separating the

people from the

problem when

expressing

emotions in

negotiations

(Steinel, Van

Kleef, &

Harinck,

2008)

Journal of

Experimental

Social

Psychology

The findings show that the

interpersonal effect of anger and

happiness highly depends on the

target of the emotion: behavioral

or person-oriented.

When the emotions target the

former anger brings more

cooperation than happiness. On

the contrary when the emotions

target the person the anger elicits

less cooperation then the

happiness.


Emotions as

strategic

information:

Effects of

other’s

emotional

expressions on

fixed-pie

perception,

demands, and

integrative

behavior in

negotiation

(Pietroni,

Van Kleef,

De Dreu, &

Pagliaro,

2008)

Journal of

Experimental

Social

Psychology

The study shows that in particular

combinations of emotional

expression such as the expression

of anger on the low priority issue

and happiness on the high priority

issue in the may increase the

chance of the negotiators to find

integrative solution of the fix-pie

perception.

Unfixing the

fixed pie: A

motivated

information-

processing

approach to

integrative

negotiation

(De Dreu,

Koole, &

Steinel,

2000)

Journal of

Personality

and Social

Psychology

The research reveals that an

integrative outcome of a

negotiation depends on the

nondirectional motivation of the

participants. Meaning that people

with high nondirectional

motivation encode the

information they give in a better

way which results in mutually

beneficial agreement at the end.

5 PROPOSITIONS (HYPOTHESIS)

Emotion/Situation Situation A:

- High time

pressure

Situation B:

- Low time pressure

Sadness

Neutral

Proposition 1: Negotiators expressing sadness will claim more value in Situation B

compared to Situation A.


Proposition 2: Negotiators expressing sadness will claim more value In Situation B

compared with neutral expression in Situation B.

Proposition 3: Negotiators expressing sadness will claim less value in Situation A

compared with the neutral emotional expressers in Situation A.

Proposition 4: The difference in the claimed value between the neutral expresser in

Situation A and in Situation B will be insignificant.

All of the proposition are in accordance with the EASI theory(Van Kleef et al., 2012).

The first one refers to the appropriateness of the situation. According to the theory

when there is low time pressure the observer’s motivation to consider the emotions of

the expresser is higher which will lead to higher concessions by the former (Sinaceur

et al., 2014; Van Kleef et al., 2004b). The second and the third proposition are

supported by the EASI theory and previous studies on expressing anger and happiness.

Following the same pattern it is expected that the value claimed by sad expresser will

be higher than the value gained by neutral participant in situation A while in situation

B the converse is expected to be true in other words symmetrical and asymmetrical

effects. (Van Kleef et al., 2004a; Van Kleef, 2014). Finally I expect not to have any

significant difference in the gained value between the situations in the neutral

condition as noticed in the experiments conducted by Sinaceur et al. (2014).

If the experiment proves that the propositions are true I will be able to combine my

results with those of Sinaceur’s paper (2014) and to state that there are enough

evidence for symmetrical and asymmetrical effects of sadness in negotiation.


6 METHODOLOGY

Following the examples of previous studies (Sinaceur et al., 2014; Sinaceur & Tiedens,

2006; Steinel et al., 2008; Van Kleef et al., 2004a, 2004b; Van Kleef, De Dreu,

Pietroni, et al., 2006; Van Kleef & De Dreu, 2010) it is assumed that conducting

experiment would be a sufficient method to prove the propositions.

Experiment

Emotion/Situation Situation A:

- High time

pressure

Situation B:

- Low time pressure

Sadness

Neutral

Following the example of Sinaceur (2014) the participants will receive negotiation task

and will have 25 minutes for preparation. The negotiation itself will continue 25

minutes and after the participants will fill in questionnaire. Then the questions would

be 7 position Likert scales which will be analyzed in order to prove the four

propositions.

The students will be either rewarded with credits or will not rewarded for participating.

Time needed: 60 minutes per dyad meaning 3600 minutes in total for 1 experiment.

However, while negotiation is in progress then other dyad will be preparing which

decreases to 1860 minutes. If there are 2 rooms for conducting the negotiation and 2

rooms for preparing then the time will be reduced reaching 930 minutes which is

almost two working days (1 working day is 480 minutes).

The expresser of sadness apart from the negotiation task (deal information, pay off

chart) will receive information about how to behave in order to express sadness (facial

expressions, vocal differences, movements, these will be explained in the emotion

part?).

The other participant (the perceiver) apart from receiving the general information for

the negotiation task he will be given information that he has to finish the deal as fast

as he can which will increase the time pressure. Moreover, it could be manipulated via

the payoff chart.


Both of the participants will be asked to maximize the gain value according to the

payoff chart.

7 STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Literature review

a. Negotiation fundamentals

b. Emotion fundamental

c. Emotions in negotiations

3. Propositions

4. Methodology

a. Experiment 1

i. Design

ii. Manipulation

iii. Results

5. General discussion

6. Managerial and Theoretical implications

7. Limitations and future research

8. Conclusion

9. Bibliography


8 TIME SCHEDULE

Activity 09.14 10.14 11.14 12.14 01.15 02.15 03.15 04.15 05.15

Choosing a topic X

Writing Exposé X

Reading literature X X X

Writing chapter:

Negotiations

fundamentals

X X

Writing chapter:

Emotions

Fundamentals

X X

Writing chapter:

Emotions in

Negotiations

X X

Experiment(s)

development

X

Experiment(s)

conduction

X X

Analyzing the results

of the experiment(s)

X X X

Writing chapter:

Methodology

X

Writing chapter:

General discussion

X X

Writing chapter:

Managerial

implications

X X

Writing chapter:

Limitations and

future research

X X

Writing chapter:

Conclusions

X X

Preparing the final

presentation

X X

Important dates:

15.12.2014 – First draft of the intermediate presentation, 28.01.2015 – Intermediate

Presentation, 30.05.2014 – Final Presentation


9 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bucy, E. P. (2000). Emotional and evaluative consequences of inappropriate leader

displays. Communication Research (Vol. 27, pp. 194–226).

doi:10.1177/009365000027002004

Côté, S., Hideg, I., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2013). The consequences of faking anger in

negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(3), 453–463.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.12.015

Daniel, E., Dys, S. P., Buchmann, M., & Malti, T. (2014). Developmental relations

between sympathy, moral emotion attributions, moral reasoning, and social

justice values from childhood to early adolescence. Journal of Adolescence,

37(7), 1201–14. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.08.009

De Dreu, C. K. W., Koole, S. L., & Steinel, W. (2000). Unfixing the fixed pie: A

motivated information-processing approach to integritive negotiation. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 975–987. doi:10.1037//0022-

3514.79.6.975

Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation, and moral development. Annual Review

of Psychology, (51), 665–697. Retrieved from

http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.665

Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to Yes: Negotiating without Giving in. (B.

Patton, Ed.) (2nd ed., p. 207). Houghton Muffin.

Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM).

Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 39–66. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.117.1.39

Frijda, N. H. (2007). The Laws of Emotion (p. 352). London: Lawrence erlbaum

associates.

Frijda, N. H. (2008). The psychologists’ point of view. In Lewis, Haviland-Jones, &

Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (Third., pp. 68–85). New York: The

Guilford Press.

Geddes, D., & Callister, R. R. (2007). Crossing the line(s): A dual threshold model of

anger in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 721–746.

doi:10.5465/AMR.2007.25275495

Gelfand, M. J., & Brett, J. M. (2004). The handbook of negotiation and culture. (J.

M. Brett & M. J. Gelfand, Eds.) (p. 479). Retrieved from

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xsOfOIzoZigC&oi=fnd&pg=PR

5&dq=The+Handbook+of+Negotiation+and+Culture&ots=qfxAWV3SJL&sig=

nABjoz2JDd7H_lce4_V6oA_MHJI

Goldenberg, A., Saguy, T., & Halperin, E. (2014). How group-based emotions are

shaped by collective emotions: evidence for emotional transfer and emotional

burden. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(4), 581–596.


Graziano, W. G., Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Hair, E. C. (1996). Perceiving

interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: The case for agreeableness. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 70(4), 820–835. doi:10.1037//0022-

3514.70.4.820

Hareli, S. (2014). Making sense of the social world and influencing it by using a

naive attribution theory of emotions. Emotion Review, 6(4), 336–343.

doi:10.1177/1754073914534501

Hareli, S., & Hess, U. (2010). What emotional reactions can tell us about the nature

of others: An appraisal perspective on person perception. Cognition & Emotion,

24(1), 128–140. doi:10.1080/02699930802613828

Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional contagion. Current

Directions in Psychological Science, 2(3), 96–99.

Heerdink, M. W., Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., & Fischer, A. H. (2013). On the

social influence of emotions in groups: Interpersonal effects of anger and

happiness on conformity versus deviance. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 105(2), 262–84. doi:10.1037/a0033362

Horstmann, G. (2003). What do facial expressions convey: Feeling states, behavioral

intentions, or actions requests? Emotion, 3(2), 150–166. doi:10.1037/1528-

3542.3.2.150

Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (1999). Social functions of emotions at four levels of

analysis. Cognition & Emotion, 13(5), 505–522.

Kennedy-Moore, E., & Watson, J. C. (2001). How and when does emotional

expression help? Review of General Psychology, 5(3), 187–212.

doi:10.1037//1089-2680.5.3.187

Kitayama, S., Mesquita, B., & Karasawa, M. (2006). Cultural affordances and

emotional experience: Socially engaging and disengaging emotions in Japan and

the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 890–

903. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.890

Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind:

“Seizing” and “freezing.” Psychological Review, 103(2), 263–283.

doi:10.1037//0033-295X.103.2.263

Lazarus, R. (1991). Emotion & Adaptation (p. 557). New York: Oxford University

Press.

Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2010). Negotiation (6th ed., p. 632).

McGraw-Hill.

Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Negotation: Readings,

Exercises, and Cases (6th ed., p. 708). McGraw-Hill.


Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th

ed., p. 290). McGraw-Hill.

Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Minton, J. W. (1999). Negotiation (3rd ed.).

Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

Lewis, M., Haviland-Jones, J. M., & Barret, L. F. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of

Emotions (3rd ed., p. 848). New York: Guilford Press.

Luecke, R. (2003). Negotiation (p. 170). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Lytle, A. L., Brett, J. M., & Shapiro, D. L. (1999). The strategic use of interests,

rights ,and power to resolve disputes. Negotiation Journal, 15(January), 31–49.

Martinez, A., & Du, S. (2012). A model of the perception of facial expressions of

emotion by humans : Research overview and perspectives. Journal of Machine

Learning Research, 13(2012), 1589–1608.

Opresnik, M. O. (2014). The hidden rules of successful negotiation and

communication (p. 136). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-06194-8

Pietroni, D., Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Pagliaro, S. (2008). Emotions

as strategic information: Effects of other’s emotional expressions on fixed-pie

perception, demands, and integrative behavior in negotiation. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology, 44(6), 1444–1454.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2008.06.007

Porath, C. L., Overbeck, J. R., & Pearson, C. M. (2008). Picking pp the gauntlet :

How individuals respond to status challenges. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 38(7), 1945–1980.

Scherer, K. R., & Ceschi, G. (2000). Criteria for emotion recognition from verbal

and nonverbal expression: studying baggage loss in the airport. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(3), 327–339. doi:10.1177/0146167200265006

Scherer, K. R., & Grandjean, D. (2008). Facial expressions allow inference of both

emotions and their components. Cognition & Emotion, 22(5), 789–801.

doi:10.1080/02699930701516791

Shields, S. A. (2005). The politics of emotion in everyday life: “Appropriate”

emotion and claims on identity. Review of General Psychology, 9(1), 3–15.

doi:10.1037/1089-2680.9.1.3

Siegman, A. W., & Boyle, S. (1993). Voices of fear and anxiey and sadness and

depression effects of speach rate and loudness on fear and anxiety and sadness

and depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102(3), 430–437.

Sinaceur, M., Kopelman, S., Vasiljevic, D., & Haag, C. (2014). Weep and get more:

When and why sadness expression is effective in negotiations. Working paper

(p. 66).


Sinaceur, M., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Get mad and get more than even: When and

why anger expression is effective in negotiations. Journal of Experimental

Social Psychology, 42(3), 314–322. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.05.002

Smith, C. A., Haynes, K. N., Lazarus, R., & Pope, L. K. (1993). In Search of the

“hot” cognitions: Attributes, appraisals, and their relation to emotion. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 65(5), 916–929.

Steinel, W., Van Kleef, G. A., & Harinck, F. (2008). Are you talking to me?!

Separating the people from the problem when expressing emotions in

negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(2), 362–369.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.002

Thompson, L. L. (Ed.). (2006). Bargaining with Feeling: Emotionality in and Around

Negotiations. In Negotiation Theory and Research (p. 237). New York:

Psycholo Press Taylor & Francis Group.

Thompson, L. L. (2009). The mind and heart of the negotiator (p. 411). Pearson

education international.

Van Kleef, G. A. (2009). How emotions regulate social life: The emotions as social

information (EASI) model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3),

184–188. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01633.x

Van Kleef, G. A. (2014). Understanding the positive and negative effects of

emotional expressions in organizations: EASI does it. Human Relations, 67(9),

1145–1164. doi:10.1177/0018726713510329

Van Kleef, G. A., & Côté, S. (2007). Expressing anger in conflict: When it helps and

when it hurts. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1557–69.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1557

Van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2010). Longer-term consequences of anger

expression in negotiation: Retaliation or spillover? Journal of Experimental

Social Psychology, 46(5), 753–760. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.03.013

Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2004a). The

interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 57–76. doi:10.1037/0022-

3514.86.1.57

Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2004b). The

interpersonal effects of emotions in negotiations: a motivated information

processing approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(4), 510–

28. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.510

Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006). Supplication and

appeasement in conflict and negotiation: The interpersonal effects of

disappointment, worry, guilt, and regret. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 91(1), 124–42. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.124


Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Pietroni, D., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006).

Power and emotion in negotiation: Power moderates the interpersonal effects of

anger and happiness on concession making. European Journal of …,

581(October 2005), 557–581. Retrieved from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.320/abstract

Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., & Cheshin, A. (2012). Emotional influence at

work: Take it EASI. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(4), 311–339.

doi:10.1177/2041386612454911

Van Kleef, G. A., Oveis, C., Van der Löwe, I., Luokogan, A., Goetz, J., & Keltner,

D. (2008). Power, distress, and compassion turning a blind eye to the suffering

of others. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1315–1323. Retrieved from

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/19/12/1315.short

symmetrical and asymmetrical effects of expressed sadness when

Documents