IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v12y2003i6d10.1023_bgrup.0000004334.14310.90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Caught Telling the Truth: Effects of Honesty and Communication Media in Distributive Negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • Paul W. Paese

    (University of Missouri - St. Louis)

  • Ann Marie Schreiber

    (University of Missouri - St. Louis)

  • Adam W. Taylor

    (University of Missouri - St. Louis)

Abstract

In the present research, the authors varied the presence versus absence of an honest disclosure in two-party negotiations. Confederates who posed as participants and followed a script carried out the disclosure manipulation. In Experiment 1, communication mode (face-to-face vs. telephone vs. electronic mail) was crossed with disclosure, and an interaction was observed. Specifically, the remote media (phone and e-mail) were found to induce competitive negotiation behavior, but only when there was no honest disclosure; that is, the honest disclosure suppressed the competitive behavior that was otherwise induced by the remote media. Experiment 2 replicated the e-mail condition of Experiment 1, with the only difference being that negotiators were anonymous to one another. Despite the anonymity, the honest disclosure continued to have the same cooperation-inducing effect. Implications of these results and future research directions are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul W. Paese & Ann Marie Schreiber & Adam W. Taylor, 2003. "Caught Telling the Truth: Effects of Honesty and Communication Media in Distributive Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(6), pages 537-566, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:12:y:2003:i:6:d:10.1023_b:grup.0000004334.14310.90
    DOI: 10.1023/B:GRUP.0000004334.14310.90
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000004334.14310.90
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000004334.14310.90?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Siegel, Jane & Dubrovsky, Vitaly & Kiesler, Sara & McGuire, Timothy W., 1986. "Group processes in computer-mediated communication," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 157-187, April.
    2. Moore, Don A. & Kurtzberg, Terri R. & Thompson, Leigh L. & Morris, Michael W., 1999. "Long and Short Routes to Success in Electronically Mediated Negotiations: Group Affiliations and Good Vibrations, , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 22-43, January.
    3. Valley, Kathleen L. & Moag, Joseph & Bazerman, Max H., 1998. "'A matter of trust':: Effects of communication on the efficiency and distribution of outcomes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 211-238, February.
    4. Tinsley, Catherine H. & O'Connor, Kathleen M. & Sullivan, Brandon A., 2002. "Tough guys finish last: the perils of a distributive reputation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 621-642, July.
    5. Bolton, Gary E, 1991. "A Comparative Model of Bargaining: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1096-1136, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ingmar Geiger, 2020. "From Letter to Twitter: A Systematic Review of Communication Media in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 207-250, April.
    2. Andreas Engelmann & Ingrid Bauer & Mateusz Dolata & Michael Nadig & Gerhard Schwabe, 2022. "Promoting Less Complex and More Honest Price Negotiations in the Online Used Car Market with Authenticated Data," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 419-451, April.
    3. Michael Ahearne & Yashar Atefi & Son K. Lam & Mohsen Pourmasoudi, 2022. "The future of buyer–seller interactions: a conceptual framework and research agenda," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 22-45, January.
    4. Edy Glozman & Netta Barak-Corren & Ilan Yaniv, 2013. "False negotiations: The art & science of not reaching an agreement," Discussion Paper Series dp646, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. SimanTov-Nachlieli, Ilanit & Har-Vardi, Liron & Moran, Simone, 2020. "When negotiators with honest reputations are less (and more) likely to be deceived," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 68-84.
    2. Sandy Jap & Diana C. Robertson & Ryan Hamilton, 2011. "The Dark Side of Rapport: Agent Misbehavior Face-to-Face and Online," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1610-1622, January.
    3. Fisman, Raymond & Khanna, Tarun, 1999. "Is trust a historical residue? Information flows and trust levels," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 79-92, January.
    4. Van Zant, Alex B. & Kray, Laura J., 2013. ""I Can't Lie to Your Face": Minimal Face-to-Face Interaction Promotes Honestry," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt88f3409v, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    5. Croson, Rachel & Boles, Terry & Murnighan, J. Keith, 2003. "Cheap talk in bargaining experiments: lying and threats in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 143-159, June.
    6. Hart, Einav & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2020. "Getting to less: When negotiating harms post-agreement performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 155-175.
    7. Loewenstein, Jeffrey & Morris, Michael W. & Chakravarti, Agnish & Thompson, Leigh & Kopelman, Shirli, 2005. "At a loss for words: Dominating the conversation and the outcome in negotiation as a function of intricate arguments and communication media," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 28-38, September.
    8. Kurtzberg, Terri R. & Naquin, Charles E. & Belkin, Liuba Y., 2005. "Electronic performance appraisals: The effects of e-mail communication on peer ratings in actual and simulated environments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 216-226, November.
    9. Wilson, Jeanne M. & Straus, Susan G. & McEvily, Bill, 2006. "All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 16-33, January.
    10. Tinsley, Catherine H. & O'Connor, Kathleen M. & Sullivan, Brandon A., 2002. "Tough guys finish last: the perils of a distributive reputation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 621-642, July.
    11. Yao, Jingjing & Brett, Jeanne M. & Zhang, Zhi-Xue & Ramirez-Marin, Jimena, 2021. "Multi-issue offers strategy and joint gains in negotiations: How low-trust negotiators get things done," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 9-23.
    12. Frank, Bjorn, 1998. "Good news for experimenters: subjects do not care about your welfare," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 171-174, November.
    13. Özgür Yýlmaz, 2012. "The Strategic Advantage of Inequality Averse Preferences," Bogazici Journal, Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, Bogazici University, Department of Economics, vol. 26(2), pages 83-91.
    14. Philipp Otto & Friedel Bolle, 2011. "Matching markets with price bargaining," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 322-348, September.
    15. Christian Thoeni & Simon Gaechter, 2011. "Peer Effects and Social Preferences in Voluntary Cooperation," Discussion Papers 2011-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    16. Ahammad, Mohammad Faisal & Tarba, Shlomo Y. & Liu, Yipeng & Glaister, Keith W. & Cooper, Cary L., 2016. "Exploring the factors influencing the negotiation process in cross-border M&A," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 445-457.
    17. Charness, Gary & Haruvy, Ernan, 2002. "Altruism, equity, and reciprocity in a gift-exchange experiment: an encompassing approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 203-231, August.
    18. Ann B. Gillette & Thomas H. Noe, 2006. "If at First You Don't Succeed: The Effect of the Option to Resolicit on Corporate Takeovers," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 19(2), pages 561-603.
    19. Gale, John & Binmore, Kenneth G. & Samuelson, Larry, 1995. "Learning to be imperfect: The ultimatum game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 56-90.
    20. Angelo Antoci & Fabio Sabatini, 2018. "Online networks, social interaction and segregation: an evolutionary approach," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 859-883, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:12:y:2003:i:6:d:10.1023_b:grup.0000004334.14310.90. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.