Page 223 - 4188
P. 223

221

                  intentions  and  was  likely  going  to  lie  in  the  negotiation  as  well
                  (Tenbrunsel, 1998). In related research on lying, Sagarin, Rhoads, and
                  Cialdini (1998) found that after lying to another person, the liar is more
                  likely to judge the person being lied to as less honest compared to other

                  individuals.  These  results  indicate  that  individuals’  temptation  to
                  deceive  their  counterpart  bias  their  perception  of  the  other  parties’
                  intentions, thus leading to a potentially vicious cycle (Boles et al., 2000).

                         Importantly, negotiation research has also identified ways through
                  which deception can be attenuated. For instance, deception is less likely
                  to occur when mutual interests are uncovered by the parties negotiating
                  (O’Connor  &  Carnevale,  1997),  when  negotiations  occur  face-to-face

                  rather than over email (Valley, Moag & Bazerman, 1998), when ethical
                  standards are salient (Aquino, 1998), in negotiations where parties have
                  high affective trust (Olekalns & Smith, 2009), and when negotiators ask

                  direct rather than indirect questions to their counterparts (Schweitzer &
                  Croson, 1999).
                         Over the years, then, this body of work has uncovered important

                  antecedents of deception and has also identified conditions under which
                  deception can be reduced. One question that has received less attention
                  to  date  is  how  emotions  affect  negotiator  behavior  (Brooks-Wood  &

                  Schweitzer,  2011),  and  deception  more  specifically.  During  a
                  negotiation, parties are likely to experience different emotions, or they
                  may  approach  the  negotiation  with  particularly  good  or  bad  feelings
                  (e.g.,  anger  or  anxiety).  In  fact,  the  conflict  nature  that  is  often

                  embedded  in  negotiations  makes  discussions  at  the  bargaining  table
                  frequently emotional and/or contentious (Barry, 1999; Barry & Oliver,
                  1996).  The  emotions  that  negotiators  “bring  to  the  table”  can  greatly

                  impact their decision making, their strategies and their actions (Frijda,
                  1986;  BrooksWood  &  Schweitzer,  2011),  and,  as  a  result,  the
                  subsequent  negotiated  outcomes.  How  do  emotions  influence
                  negotiators’ behavior? And, more specifically, what is the impact of the

                  emotions  negotiators  experience  during  the  negotiation  on  their
                  likelihood to deceive their counterpart?
                         In  the  remainder  of  the  chapter,  we  address  these  questions  and

                  examine  ways  in  which  emotions  affect  deception.  We  first  review
                  existing work on the role of emotions in negotiation more generally, and
                  then identify areas that have not yet received attention in the literature

                  and that could provide fruitful venues for future research.
   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228