Exploring the Cognitive-Emotional Fugue in Electronic Negotiations

Abstract

A substantial body of literature in CMC and eNS research suggests that communication via textual electronic media is devoid of emotional content as many non-and para-verbal indicators expressing emotions are missing. In order to support these theoretical positions, up to date, studies have mainly focused on the direct expression of emotions. To complement this research, we analyze transcripts from electronic negotiation experiments conducted at three universities in December 2006. By using an exploratory research methodology, i.e., content analysis and subsequent multidimensional scaling (MDS), we analyze the emotional connotation of factual statements (content layer). Thereby we take three different perspectives, (1) on a macro resolution level we assess negotiations in order to gain insight into the dynamics of emotional communication over time, (2) on a meso resolution level, single messages (speech acts) of transcripts are the units of analysis and (3) on a micro resolution level, we analyze single utterances within messages. Our results demonstrate that emotions, although not necessarily expressed explicitly, are nevertheless conveyed by the wording and phrasing of utterances. We show that factual statements in negotiations convey an emotional layer, and the same factual statements can be differentiated along their emotional connotation depending on the lexical and syntactical choices of the communicators. Furthermore, there is indication that emotions seem to evolve differently in successful and failed negotiations.

Dimensional mapping: Applying DQR and MDS to explore the perceptions of seniors' role in advertising

“…For instance, Bahl and Milne (2006) used MDS to analyze consumption experiences in narratives, and Griessmair and Koeszegi (2009) employed it to investigate single utterances as well as entire messages of electronic negotiations transcripts with regard to their emotional connotation. Just as with content analysis, MDS is also applicable to in-depth interviews, focus groups, or documents.…”

Ups and Downs: Emotional Dynamics in Negotiations and Their Effects on (In)Equity

“…A method that allows for the incorporation of an inductive, qualitative component while at the same time producing quantitative data for theory testing is multidimensional scaling (MDS). It has already been extensively used to investigate the underlying dimensions of messages, statements, or expressions in both negotiation (e.g., Griessmair and Koeszegi 2009;Pinkley et al 2005) and emotion research (e.g., Feldman 1995;White 2000). Additionally to the general advantages of MDS (Pinkley et al 2005), this procedure allows for capturing the emotional layer of the exchanged messages (Griessmair and Koeszegi 2009) rather than focusing on explicit emotional language or specific expressions.…”

“…It has already been extensively used to investigate the underlying dimensions of messages, statements, or expressions in both negotiation (e.g., Griessmair and Koeszegi 2009;Pinkley et al 2005) and emotion research (e.g., Feldman 1995;White 2000). Additionally to the general advantages of MDS (Pinkley et al 2005), this procedure allows for capturing the emotional layer of the exchanged messages (Griessmair and Koeszegi 2009) rather than focusing on explicit emotional language or specific expressions. For alternative, discourse analytic methods to analyze the emotional layer of communication in negotiation, see Martinovsky (2015a) and Martinovsky and Mao (2009).…”

“…Negotiations are dynamic processes with alternating cooperative and competitive periods (Adair and Brett 2005;Bednar and Curington 1983;Holmes 1992;Lytle et al 1999). Similarly, a number of scholars emphasize that emotions are not stationary but wax and wane over time (Fischer and Van Kleef 2010;Gibson and Fichman 2006;Griessmair and Koeszegi 2009). Furthermore, emotions may have different functions and varying impact at different phases of the negotiation (Martinovsky and Mao 2009;Martinovsky et al 2007;Morris and Keltner 2000).…”

Representative Decision-Making: Challenges to Democratic Peace Theory

“…Guilt proneness was associated with a negative judgment of both making false promises and lying, but unexpectedly, empathy was not related to disapproval of false promises, which are, in fact, not factual lies until some future point when the promise proves to be empty. Complementing spoken language and its emotion-laden messages is research undertaken by Griessmair and Koeszegi ( 2009 ) on negotiation exchanges via email. Using complex content and scaling analyses, these authors found that "factual" statements do indeed convey considerable emotional intent and connotational richness.…”