Two studies examine complementarity (vs. mimicry) of dominant and submissive nonverbal behaviors. In the first study, participants interacted with a confederate who displayed either dominance (through postural expansion) or submission (through postural constriction). On average, participants exposed to a dominant confederate decreased their postural stance, whereas participants exposed to a submissive confederate increased their stance. Further, participants with complementing responses (dominance in response to submission and submission in response to dominance) liked their partner more and were more comfortable than those who mimicked. In the second study, complementarity and mimicry were manipulated, and complementarity resulted in more liking and comfort than mimicry. The findings speak to the likelihood of hierarchical differentiation.

Power is widely acknowledged to affect negotiator performance. Yet few efforts have been made to integrate the most prominent theories of power into a cohesive framework that can account for the results from a broad array of negotiation-relevant research. We address this limitation by proposing a dynamic integrative model that decouples power into four components: (1) potential power, (2) perceived power, (3) power tactics, and (4) realized power. Implications, propositions, and future directions are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract