Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hot Versus Cool Behavioural Styles in Electronic Negotiations: The Impact of Communication Mode

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we study the effects of synchronous and asynchronous communication mode on electronic negotiations. By applying content analysis, we compare the negotiation processes of two e-negotiation simulations conducted in a synchronous and an asynchronous setting. Our results show significant differences in communication behaviour of subjects. Synchronous negotiation mode leads to less friendly, more affective, and more competitive negotiation behaviour. In the asynchronous communication mode, negotiators exchange more private and task-oriented information and are friendlier. These results suggest that negotiators in the asynchronous mode, who have more time to reflect, cool down and control emotions better while negotiators, who communicate synchronously engage more in emotional and competitive “hot” debates. In addition, negotiators in the asynchronous mode are more satisfied with the process and outcome of the negotiation. We conclude that de-individuation and escalating effects might be caused by communication mode rather than by the ability of the media to transmit social cues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brett, J. M., D. L. Shapiro, and A. L. Lytle. (1998). “Breaking the Bonds of Reciprocity in Negotiations,” Academy of Management Journal 41(4), 410–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). “A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales,” Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L. and H. Lengel. (1986). “Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design,” Management Science 32(5), 554–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delaney, M. M., A. Foroughi, and C. Perkins. (1997). “An Empirical Study of the Efficacy of a Computerized Negotiation Support System (Nss),” Decision Support Systems 20, 185–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz-Uhler, B. and C. Bishop-Clark. (2001). “The Use of Computer-Mediated Communication to Enhance Subsequent Face-to-Face Discussion,” Computers in Human Behaviour 17, 269–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • e-BusinessW@tch. (2004). The European E-Business Report: A Portrait of E-Business in 10 Sectors of the Eu Economy. Bonn, e-Business W@tch, 13.

  • Fisher, R. and W. Ury. (1981). Getting to Yes. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.

  • Friedman, R. A. and S. C. Currall. (2003). “Conflict Escalation: Dispute Exacerbating Elements of E-Mail Communication,” Human Relations 56(11), 1325–1347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, R. A. and S. C. Currall. (2004). E-Mail Escalation: Dispute Exacerbating Elements of Electronic Communication. Nashvill, Vanderbilt University, 39.

  • Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.

  • Joinson, A. (1998). Causes and Implications of Disinhibited Behaviour on the Internet. Psychology and the Internet. Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, and Transpersonal Implications. J. Gackenbach. San Diego et al., Academic Press, pp. 43–60.

  • Kersten, G. E. (2004). E-Negotiation Systems: Interaction of People and Technologies to Resolve Conflicts. UNESCAP Third Annual Forum on Online Dispute Resolution, Melbourne, Australia, 5–6 July 2004, InterNeg Research Papers INR 08/04.

  • Kersten, G. E. and S. J. Noronha. (1999). “Www-Based Negotiation Support: Design, Implementation, and Use,” Decision Support Systems 25(2), 135–154.

  • Kiesler, S., J. Siegel, and T. W. McGuire. (1984). “Social Psychological Aspects of Computer Mediated Communication,” American Psychologist 39, 1123–1134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koeszegi, S. T., K. J. Srnka, and E.-M. Pesendorfer. (2006). “Electronic Negotiations – a Comparison of Different Support Systems.” Die Betriebswirtschaft, forthcoming.

  • Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis. An Introduction to Its Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage.

  • Lea, M., T. O'Shea, P. Fung, and R. Spears. (1992). “Flaming,” in Computer-Mediated Communication. Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication. M. Lea. New York, Harvester Wheatsheaf, pp. 30–65.

  • Lengel, R. H. and R. L. Daft. (1988). “The Selection of Communication Media as an Executive Skill,” The Academy of Management Executive 2(3), 225–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayring, P. (2002). Qualitative Content Analysis – Research Instrument or Mode of Interpretation? The Role of the Researcher in Qualitative Psychology. M. Kriegelmann. Tübingen, Huber, pp. 139–148.

  • Oliver, R. L., P. V. Balakrishnan, and B. Barry. (1994). “Outcome Satisfaction in Negotiation: A Test of Expectancy Disconfirmation,” Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 60(2), 252–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, W. C. (1996). “Can a Negotiation Support System Help a Purchasing Manager?,” International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management Spring, 37–45.

  • Poole, M. S., D. L. Shannon, and G. L. DeSanctis. (1992). “Communication Media and Negotiation Process. Communication and Negotiation.” L. L. Putnam and M. E. Roloff, Newbury Park, Sage Publications 20, 46–66.

  • Putnam, L. L. and T. S. Jones. (1982). “Reciprocity in Negotiations: An Analysis of Bargaining Interaction,” Communication Monographs 48, 171–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangaswamy, A. and G. R. Shell. (1997). “Using Computers to Realize Joint Gains in Negotiations: Towards an “Electronic Bargaining Table,” Management Science 8, 1147–1163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoop, M. and C. Quix. (2001). “Doc.Com: A Framework for Effective Negotiation Support in Electronic Marketplaces,” Computer Networks 37, 153–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheffield. (1995). “The Effect of Communication Medium on Negotiation Performance,” Group Decision and Negotiation 4, 159–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spears, R. and M. Lea. (1992). Social Influence and the Influence of the “Social” in Computer-Mediated Communication. Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication. M. Lea. New York, Harvester Wheatsheaf 30–65.

  • Sproull, L. and S. Kiesler. (1986). “Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication,” Management Science 32(11), 1492–1512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srnka, K. J. and S. T. Koeszegi. (2006). “From Words to Numbers - How to Transform Rich Qualitative Data into Meaningful Quantitative Results: Guidelines and Exemplary Study,” Schmalenbach's Business Review, forthcoming.

  • Walther, J. B. (1995). “Relational Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication: Experimental Observations over Time,” Organization Science 6(2), 186–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walther, J. B. (1996). “Computer-Mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal Und Hyperpersonal Interaction,” Communication Research 23(1), 3–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingart, L. R., L. L. Thompson, M.H.Bazerman, and J. S. Carroll. (1990). “Tactical Behaviour and Negotiation Outcomes,” The International Journal of Conflict Management 1(1), 7–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, Economics, and Statistics, University of Vienna, Bruenner Str. 72, A-1210, Vienna, Austria

    Eva-Maria Pesendorfer & Sabine T. Koeszegi

Authors
  1. Eva-Maria Pesendorfer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sabine T. Koeszegi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eva-Maria Pesendorfer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pesendorfer, EM., Koeszegi, S.T. Hot Versus Cool Behavioural Styles in Electronic Negotiations: The Impact of Communication Mode. Group Decis Negot 15, 141–155 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-006-9025-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-006-9025-y

Key words

Search

Navigation