Tactical anger in negotiation: The expresser's perspective

Abstract

Presenting programmed angry messages to a negotiator has increased concession rates in a series of recent experiments. But observing responses to a computer or confederate counterpart cannot yield insight into the perceptions, reactions, and negotiation outcomes experienced by those who actually deploy anger as a tactic.We report five studies examining the anger expression decision using a range of different methods. In the fully interactive two-person integrative negotiation in Study 1, expressed anger generally degraded trust while damaging implementation of deals.That ultimately diminished value actually claimed by anger expressers. In the discrete choice experiment of Study 2, sending angry messages proved costly for expressers, who registered very high levels of measured disutility from using this tactic. In Study 3, survey respondents reported widespread unwillingness to misrepresent anger during negotiation. Recalling a past negotiation, anger correlated negatively with experienced success, indicating that disutility from expressing anger generalizes widely across different contexts. Study 4 revealed that negotiators generally consider the tactic to be unethical. More than just specific beliefs about the lack of efficacy, Study 5 revealed that the source of tactical disutility lies in generalized discomfort with the misrepresentation of anger. Implications for research, practice, and training are considered.

Anger Expression in Negotiation: The Effects of Communication Channels and Anger Intensity

“…In Study 1, we successfully replicated prior findings that anger expression leads to more concession from a negotiation partner ( Van Kleef et al, 2004a , b ; Sinaceur and Tiedens, 2006 ; Wang et al, 2012 ; Jang and Bottom, 2022 ), lower desire for future negotiation with the same partner ( Pietroni et al, 2008 ; Van Kleef and De Dreu, 2010 ), and reduced satisfaction with negotiation ( Van Kleef et al, 2004a ). Although anger expression using text/emoticon did not yield different negotiation outcomes from the neutral condition (except text condition with desire for future negotiation), when participants observed their negotiation partner’s anger through richer communication channels where more non-verbal cues are available (e.g., voice and video), the anger expression had stronger effects on all three negotiation outcomes.…”

“…In summary, the reported findings show that our research design as well as the psychological dynamics behind our observations are well-aligned with the EASI model. Our scholarly attempts confirmed that anger expression in negotiations yields favorable economic outcomes ( Wang et al, 2012 ; Jang and Bottom, 2022 ) but accompanies relational harm as a return ( Van Kleef et al, 2004a ; Van Kleef and De Dreu, 2010 ). Notwithstanding some findings inconsistent with our postulated channel effects, we observed significant and consistent findings when comparing the text-based channels (text and emoticon) to the audio-based channels (voice and video).…”

“…The pervasiveness of negotiation in real life has promoted research exploring diverse factors that impact negotiation outcomes. One factor that has garnered significant attention from scholars is the emotions that are experienced and expressed in negotiation settings ( Barry et al, 2004 ; Kopelman et al, 2006 ; Druckman and Olekalns, 2008 ; Jang and Bottom, 2022 ). Among diverse emotions, the expression of anger has been extensively studied in relation to the strategic use of emotions for achieving better deals ( Kopelman et al, 2006 ; Tng and Au, 2014 ).…”

“…Whether anger expression helps or hurts in negotiation can be a complex issue as negotiation performance can be measured either by economic ( Pietroni et al, 2008 ; Adam and Brett, 2018 ) or psychological ( Kopelman et al, 2006 ) outcomes. Prior research has reported that anger expression can elicit larger concessions from a negotiation partner leading to higher economic gain for the party who shows anger ( Van Kleef et al, 2004a , b ; Sinaceur and Tiedens, 2006 ; Jang and Bottom, 2022 ). When overall satisfaction with the negotiation process and outcome ( Van Kleef et al, 2004a , b ) and desire for future interaction with the same negotiation partner ( Van Kleef and Côté, 2007 ; Pietroni et al, 2008 ; Van Kleef and De Dreu, 2010 ) were measured to understand psychological aspects of negotiation experience, anger display by a negotiation partner was reported to invoke negative emotional experiences, reducing the other party’s desire for future interaction and overall satisfaction with the negotiation process and outcome.…”