IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v29y2020i6d10.1007_s10726-020-09698-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Perspective-Taking on Trust and Understanding in Online and Face-to-Face Mediations

Author

Listed:
  • Debby Damen

    (Tilburg University)

  • Per Wijst

    (Tilburg University)

  • Marije Amelsvoort

    (Tilburg University)

  • Emiel Krahmer

    (Tilburg University)

Abstract

This research investigates the perspective taking process in online and face-to-face mediations. In particular, it addresses the question whether a perspective taking technique—being asked circular questions—helps the establishment of mutual understanding and interpersonal trust between negotiators in online and face-to-face mediation settings. This question was studied in an experimental setting in which disputants had to solve a conflict face-to-face or online by the help of a professional mediator. During the interventions, the mediator either posed mainly circular (perspective-taking) or linear questions. It was expected that mediations in which circular questions were used would lead to a higher level of mutual understanding and interpersonal trust between the disputants, and—as a result—to a more satisfying, integrative agreement. Furthermore, this study examined whether the communication mode of the intervention (online, face-to-face) affected the re-establishment of disputants’ interpersonal trust and understanding. The results of the study show that disputants’ feelings of trust in and understanding of their interaction partner improved more in the face-to-face mediations than in the online mediations. These improved feelings of understanding and trust also predicted how satisfying and integrative disputants perceived the agreement to be. Moreover, disputants perceived their mediator to be more trustworthy and more professional in the face-to-face than in the online interventions. No effect was found for mediators’ questioning style on disputants’ improved interpersonal trust and mutual understanding. We discuss the effects of the questioning style of a mediator and conclude with reflections on reasons why these effects did not lead to differences in mutual understanding and interpersonal trust between the disputants.

Suggested Citation

  • Debby Damen & Per Wijst & Marije Amelsvoort & Emiel Krahmer, 2020. "The Effect of Perspective-Taking on Trust and Understanding in Online and Face-to-Face Mediations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(6), pages 1121-1156, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:29:y:2020:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-020-09698-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-020-09698-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-020-09698-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-020-09698-8?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. Daniel Druckman & Bennett Ramberg & Richard Harris, 2002. "Computer-Assisted International Negotiation: A Tool for Research and Practice," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 231-256, May.
    2. Michael J. Hine & Steven A. Murphy & Michael Weber & Gregory Kersten, 2009. "The Role of Emotion and Language in Dyadic E-negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 193-211, May.
    3. Michael Ströbel & Christof Weinhardt, 2003. "The Montreal Taxonomy for Electronic Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 143-164, March.
    4. Kiesler, Sara & Sproull, Lee, 1992. "Group decision making and communication technology," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 96-123, June.
    5. Yufei Yuan & Milena Head & Mei Du, 2003. "The Effects of Multimedia Communication on Web-Based Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 89-109, March.
    6. Daniel Druckman & James N. Druckman & Tatsushi Arai, 2004. "e-Mediation: Evaluating the Impacts of an Electronic Mediator on Negotiating Behavior," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 481-511, November.
    7. Hans Weigand & Mareike Schoop & Aldo de Moor & Frank Dignum, 2003. "B2B Negotiation Support: The Need for a Communication Perspective," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 3-29, January.
    8. Daniel Druckman & Ronald Mitterhofer & Michael Filzmoser & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2014. "Resolving Impasses in e-Negotiation: Does e-Mediation Work?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 193-210, March.
    9. Mareike Schoop & Marije Amelsvoort & Johannes Gettinger & Michael Koerner & Sabine T. Koeszegi & Per Wijst, 2014. "The Interplay of Communication and Decisions in Electronic Negotiations: Communicative Decisions or Decisive Communication?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 167-192, March.
    10. Kopelman, Shirli & Rosette, Ashleigh Shelby & Thompson, Leigh, 2006. "The three faces of Eve: Strategic displays of positive, negative, and neutral emotions in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 81-101, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gregory E. Kersten & Hsiangchu Lai, 2007. "Negotiation Support and E-negotiation Systems: An Overview," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 553-586, November.
    2. Daniel Druckman & Lin Adrian & Malene Flensborg Damholdt & Michael Filzmoser & Sabine T. Koszegi & Johanna Seibt & Christina Vestergaard, 2021. "Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict? Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 395-426, April.
    3. 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.
    4. Johannes Gettinger & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2014. "Far from Eye, Far from Heart: Analysis of Graphical Decision Aids in Electronic Negotiation Support," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 787-817, July.
    5. Jennifer D. Parlamis & Ingmar Geiger, 2015. "Mind the Medium: A Qualitative Analysis of Email Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 359-381, March.
    6. Michele Griessmair & Johannes Gettinger, 2020. "Take the Right Turn: The Role of Social Signals and Action–Reaction Sequences in Enacting Turning Points in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 425-459, June.
    7. Mareike Schoop, 2021. "Negotiation communication revisited," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(1), pages 163-176, March.
    8. Schilling, Martin S. & Mulford, Matthew, 2007. "In search of value-for-money in collective bargaining: an analytic-interactive mediation process," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22694, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Christoph Laubert & Jennifer Parlamis, 2019. "Are You Angry (Happy, Sad) or Aren’t You? Emotion Detection Difficulty in Email Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 377-413, April.
    10. Ofir Turel & Yufei Yuan & Joe Rose, 2007. "Antecedents of attitude towards online mediation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 539-552, November.
    11. Sriram Venkiteswaran & Rangaraja P. Sundarraj, 2021. "How Angry are You? Anger Intensity, Demand and Subjective Value in Multi-round Distributive Electronic Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 143-170, February.
    12. Cheshin, Arik & Rafaeli, Anat & Bos, Nathan, 2011. "Anger and happiness in virtual teams: Emotional influences of text and behavior on others' affect in the absence of non-verbal cues," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 2-16, September.
    13. Daniel Druckman & Ronald Mitterhofer & Michael Filzmoser & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2014. "Resolving Impasses in e-Negotiation: Does e-Mediation Work?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 193-210, March.
    14. Mareike Schoop & Marije Amelsvoort & Johannes Gettinger & Michael Koerner & Sabine T. Koeszegi & Per Wijst, 2014. "The Interplay of Communication and Decisions in Electronic Negotiations: Communicative Decisions or Decisive Communication?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 167-192, March.
    15. Rudolf Vetschera, 2016. "Concessions Dynamics in Electronic Negotiations: A Cross-Lagged Regression Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 245-265, March.
    16. Ofir Turel & Yufei Yuan, 2007. "User Acceptance of Web-Based Negotiation Support Systems: The Role of Perceived Intention of the Negotiating Partner to Negotiate Online," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 451-468, September.
    17. Brett, Jeanne & Thompson, Leigh, 2016. "Negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 68-79.
    18. Ashleigh Shelby Rosette & Shirli Kopelman & JeAnna Lanza Abbott, 2014. "Good Grief! Anxiety Sours the Economic Benefits of First Offers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 629-647, May.
    19. Morad Benyoucef & Marie-Hélène Verrons, 2008. "Configurable e-negotiation systems for large scale and transparent decision making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 211-224, May.
    20. van Knippenberg, Daan & van Knippenberg, Barbara & van Dijk, Eric, 2000. "Who Takes the Lead in Risky Decision Making? Effects of Group Members' Risk Preferences and Prototypicality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 213-234, November.

    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:29:y:2020:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-020-09698-8. 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.