This study provides a sequential analysis of the bargaining interaction to shed light on how negotiators’ interaction goals influence their and their counterparts’ behavioral responses and outcomes. Sixty-seven negotiation dyads simulated an employment negotiation. Results showed that integrative reciprocal sequences mediated the influence of competitive goals on joint profit, whereas both distributive and integrative transformational sequences mediated the influence of negotiators’ goals on their counterparts’ individual gains. Such mediating effects, however, vary by phase, with reciprocal sequences in the second half of negotiation more predictive of joint profit but transformational sequences in the first half more predictive of individual gains. In addition, employers’ interaction goals and transformational sequences had a greater influence on employees’ individual gains than vice versa.
AdairW.BrettJ. M. (2005). The negotiation dance: Time, culture, and behavioral sequences in negotiation. Organizational Science, 16, 33-51.
2.
AdairW. L.WeingartL. R.BrettJ. M. (2007). The timing of offers and information exchange in U.S. and Japanese negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1056-1068.
3.
BergerC. R. (2000). Goal detection and efficiency: Neglected aspects of message production. Communication Theory, 10, 156-166.
4.
BodenmannG.LedermannT.BradburyT. N. (2007). Stress, sex, and satisfaction in marriage. Personal Relationships, 14, 551-569.
5.
CarnevaleP. J. D.De DreuC. K. W. (2006). Motive: The negotiator’s raison d’être. In ThompsonL. L. (Ed.), Frontiers of social psychology: Negotiation theory and research (pp. 55-76). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
6.
De DreuC. K. W.WeingartL. R.KwonS. (2000). Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: A meta-analytical review and test of two theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 889-905.
7.
DonohueW. A. (1981). Development of a model of rule use in negotiation interaction. Communication Monographs, 48, 106-120.
8.
FehrE.GächerS. (2000). Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, 159-181.
9.
GiebelsE.TaylorP. J. (2009). Interaction patterns in crisis negotiations: Persuasive arguments and cultural differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 5-19.
10.
KawadaC. L. K.OettingenG.GollwitzerP. M.BarghJ. A. (2004). The projection of implicit and explicit goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 545, 559.
11.
KeckK. L.SampJ. A. (2007). The dynamic nature of goals and message production as revealed in a sequential analysis of conflict interactions. Human Communication Research, 33, 27-47.
12.
KelleyH. H.StahelskiA. J. (1970). Social interaction basis of cooperators and competitors beliefs about others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 401-419.
13.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
14.
HassinR.AartsH.FergusonM. J. (2005). Automatic goal inferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 129-140.
15.
HolmesM. E. (1992). Phase structures in negotiation. In PutnamL. L.RoloffM. E. (Eds.), Communication and negotiation (pp. 83-105). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
LiuM. (2009). The intrapersonal and interpersonal effects of anger on negotiation performance: A cross-cultural investigation. Human Communication Research, 35, 148-169.
17.
LiuM. (2011). Cultural differences in goal-directed interaction patterns in negotiation. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research4(3), 178-199.
18.
LiuM.WangC. (2010). Explaining the influence of anger and compassion on negotiators’ interaction goals: An assessment of trust and distrust as two distinct mediators. Communication Research, 37, 442-472.
19.
LiuM.WilsonS. R. (2011). The effects of interaction goals on negotiation tactics and outcomes: A dyad-level analysis across two cultures. Communication Research, 38, 248-277.
20.
McCabeK.RassentiS.SmithV. (1996). Game theory and reciprocity in some extensive form experimental games. Proceedings National Academy of Science, 93, 13421-13428.
21.
MageeJ. C.GalinskyA. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annuals, 2, 351-398.
OlekalnsM.SmithP. L. (2000). Negotiating optimal outcomes: The role of strategic sequences in competitive negotiations. Human Communication Research, 26, 527-557.
24.
OlekalnsM.SmithP. L. (2003). Social motives in negotiation: The relationship between dyad composition, negotiation processes and outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 14, 233-254.
25.
OlekalnsM.WeingartL. R. (2008). Emergent negotiations: Stability and shifts in negotiation dynamics. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 1, 135-160.
26.
OlekalnsM.BrettJ. M.WeingartL. R. (2003). Phases, transitions, and interruptions: Modeling processes in multi-party negotiations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 14, 191-211.
27.
OlekalnsM.SmithP. L.WalshT. (1996). The process of negotiating: Strategy and timing as predictors of outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 68-77.
28.
PalomaresN. A. (2008). Toward a theory of goal detection in social interaction. Communication Research, 35, 109-148.
29.
PalomaresN. A. (2011). The dynamics of goal congruency and cognitive busyness in goal detection. Communication Research, 38(4), 517-542.
30.
PhillipsW.Baron-CohenS.RutterM. (1992). The role of eye-contact in the detection of goals: Evidence from normal toddlers, and children with autism or mental handicap. Development and Psychopathology, 4, 375-383.
31.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717-731.
32.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.
33.
PruittD. G.LewisS. A. (1975). Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 621-633.
34.
PutnamL. L.JonesT. S. (1982). Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction. Communication Monographs, 49, 171-191.
35.
PutnamL. L.RoloffM. E. (1992). Communication perspectives on negotiation. In PutnamL. L.RoloffM. E. (Eds.), Communication and negotiation (pp. 1-17). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
36.
PutnamL. L.WilsonS. R.TurnerD. B. (1990). The evolution of policy arguments in teachers’ negotiations. Argumentation, 4, 129-152.
37.
RabinM. (1993). Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. American Economic Review, 83, 1281-1302.
38.
TiedensL. Z.FragaleA. R. (2003). Power moves: Complementarity in submissive and dominant nonverbal behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 558-568.
39.
ThompsonL. L.MedvecV. H.SeidenV.KopelmanS. (2001). Poker face, smiley face, and rant ‘n’ rave: Myths and realities about emotion in negotiation. In HoggM. A.TindaleR. S. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes (pp. 139-163). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
40.
UllerC. (2004). Disposition to recognize goals in infant chimpanzees. Animal Cognition, 7, 154-161.
41.
Van KleefG. A.De DreuC. K. W.MansteadA. S. R. (2004). The interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 57-76.
42.
WeingartL. R.OlekalnsM. (2004). Communication processes in negotiation: Frequencies, sequences, and phases. In GelfandM. J.BrettJ. M. (Eds.), The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp. 143-157). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
43.
WeingartL. R.OlekalnsM.SmithP. L. (2004). Quantitative coding of negotiation behavior. International Negotiation, 9, 441-456.
44.
WeingartL. R.BrettJ. M.OlekalnsM.SmithP. L. (2007). Conflicting social motives in negotiating groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 994-1010.
45.
WilsonS. R.PutnamL. L. (1990). Interaction goals in negotiation. In AndersonJ. A. (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 13 (pp. 374-406). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
46.
ZetikD. C.StuhlmacherM. F. (2002). Goal setting and negotiation performance: A meta-analysis. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 5, 35-52.
