Purpose Drawing from the emotions as social information theory, this paper aims to investigate the differential effects of emotions in inter vs intracultural negotiations. Design/methodology/approach The authors used one face-to-face negotiation and two experimental scenario studies to investigate the influence of emotions (anger vs happiness) and negotiation type (intercultural vs intracultural) on concession behavior. Findings Across the three studies, the results consistently show that angry opponents from a different national culture obtain larger concessions from negotiators. A face-to-face negotiation shows that happy opponents from the same culture are able to obtain larger concessions from negotiators. Additionally, the negotiator’s intentions to compromise and yield mediate the relationship between the interaction of emotions and counterpart’s culture on concessions. Research limitations/implications Two limitations are that the studies were conducted in a single country and that they use different types of role-playing designs. The empirical implications provide evidence of the moderating effect of the counterpart’s culture on the effect of anger on concessions. Then, providing two different mechanisms for concessions. Practical implications The research helps global negotiators who face counterparts from different nationalities. It suggests that these negotiators should be mindful of their counterpart’s emotions in intercultural negotiation as anger seems to generate more concessions in this setting. Originality/value The article is among the first studies to show that the combination of the counterpart’s culture and emotions has an effect on concessions in negotiation. Compromising and yielding are mediating mechanisms for this moderated effect. As opposed to previous studies that use one type of research design, the research combines face-to-face and scenario methodologies to test the predictions.

Purpose Negotiations are often conducted under stress. Previous studies show that stress can help or hurt negotiation outcomes. This study suggests that individual differences explain these effects, and the purpose of this study is to examine the effect of social value orientation (SVO) and stress on negotiation outcomes. Design/methodology/approach Two experimental studies and a pilot investigate the influence of stress and SVO (prosocial vs proself) on negotiation offers and outcomes. The authors’ studies are grounded on social interdependence theory and arousal literatures to explain the effects of stress on negotiation. Findings Stress has a positive influence on integrative offers (S1) and joint outcomes (S2). SVO moderates the effect of stress on joint negotiation outcomes (S2), such that, under stress, prosocials fare better than proselfs. Research limitations/implications Managers negotiating under stress should pay attention to their own as well as the others’ SVOs. Managers could also build their negotiation teams considering this individual difference and favor the presence of prosocials in stressful negotiations. Practical implications The findings have practical implications for managers who are under stress on a daily basis. Social implications This research contributes to managers that need to understand how to reach integrative agreements under stress. This is especially important when negotiators are representatives of employees or companies, as the outcomes can affect many individuals. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study examining the relationship between stress, SVO and negotiation offers and outcomes.