Charles E. Naquin

Online bargaining and interpersonal trust.

The presented study explores the effect of interacting over the Internet on interpersonal trust when bargaining online. Relative to face-to-face negotiations, online negotiations were characterized by (a) lower levels of pre-negotiation trust and (b) lower levels of post-negotiation trust. The reduced levels of pre-negotiation trust in online negotiations (i.e., before any interaction took place) demonstrate that negotiators bring different expectations to the electronic bargaining table than to face-to-face negotiations. These negative perceptions of trust were found to mediate another aspect of the relationship, namely, desired future interaction. Those who negotiated online reported less desire for future interactions with the other party. Online negotiators also were less satisfied with their outcome and less confident in the quality of their performance, despite the absence of observable differences in economic outcome quality.

The team halo effect: why teams are not blamed for their failures.

In this study, the existence of the team halo effect, the phenomenon that teams tend not to be blamed for their failures, is documented. With 2 studies using both real teams and controlled scenarios, the authors found evidence that the nature of the causal attribution processes used to diagnose failure scenarios leads to individuals being more likely to be identified as the cause of team failure than the team as a collective. Team schema development, as indexed by team experience, influences this effect, with individuals who have more team experience being less likely to show the team halo effect

The finer points of lying online: e-mail versus pen and paper.

The authors present 3 experimental studies that build on moral disengagement theory by exploring lying in online environments. Findings indicate that, when e-mail is compared with pen and paper communication media (both of which are equal in terms of media richness, as both are text only), people are more willing to lie when communicating via e-mail than via pen and paper and feel more justified in doing so. The findings were consistent whether the task assured participants that their lie either would or would not be discovered by their counterparts. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

The agony of opportunity in negotiation: Number of negotiable issues, counterfactual thinking, and feelings of satisfaction

It has long been believed in the negotiation literature that increasing the number of issues in a negotiation is a positive feature because it increases integrative opportunities. But does this also increase negotiator satisfaction? Two studies are presented that examine this relationship between the number of issues in a negotiation and feelings of satisfaction immediately following the negotiation. Results indicate that those who negotiated the most issues felt the worse about their outcome. The proposed mechanism for this effect, that negotiators who deal with more issues generate more counterfactual thoughts imagining better possible outcomes, was tested and confirmed.

Humor as a relationship-building tool in online negotiations

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of humor in online negotiations and assess whether humor can act as a bridge for the otherwise relationship‐poor experience of negotiating via e‐mail.Design/methodology/approach – Two experimental studies are conducted, using 122 executive MBA students and 216 MBA students respectively.Findings – Study 1 demonstrates that beginning an e‐mail transaction with humor results in: increased trust and satisfaction levels; higher joint gains for the dyad; and higher individual gains for the party who initiated the humorous event. Analyses reveals that it is the exploration of compatible issues (as opposed to effective tradeoffs) – that increased the level of joint gain. Study 2 demonstrates that first offers in a purely distributive negotiation are more likely to be within the bargaining zone when e‐negotiations are initiated with humor, and the resulting final settlements in the humor condition are also more equally distributed between parties (more of ...

Fairness judgments and counterfactual thinking: pricing goods versus services

Purpose – This paper aims to propose and empirically document the idea that people’s perceptions of having been treated fairly depend, in part, on whether the explanation provided to them of a product’s pricing is primarily based on the costs of labor (a service) versus materials (goods). Because materials are more fixed and tangible than the effort of labor, it is argued that people will have fewer counterfactual thoughts about how things could have been different with the cost of materials than those associated with labor. This has implications for fairness judgments more generally, as it suggests that people may be uneven in which types of data they attend to when making fairness judgments. Three experiments are presented that empirically test the relationship between the salience of goods versus services in the price paid and the resulting perceptions of fairness. Findings confirm that thoughts of money spent on a service were associated with lesser feelings of fairness than were thoughts of money spe...

High Tech Versus High Touch: Comparing Electronic and Hard-Copy Gift Cards

Previous research in the area of how individuals respond to hard-copy versus electronic communications indicates inconsistent results. Although media richness theory suggests that there is no theoretical distinction between physical, hard-copy and electronic, text-based communications, other research has shown that an individual’s response varies depending on the type of communication. The present research explores the reaction to unexpected opportunities as a function of how the communications are received—either via email or as a hard-copy. Results indicate that participants were equally satisfied to receive either an electronic or a physical gift certificate; however, they redeemed them in unequal amounts. Participants who received a physical gift card were more likely to redeem their gifts and were more likely to spend a greater amount of the total gift card than those who received an electronic one.

Computer-Aided Tools in Negotiation: Negotiable Issues, Counterfactual Thinking, and Satisfaction

Negotiations research has identified both economic and social-psychological outcomes are important for negotiations. Despite the economic advantages of having multiple issues to negotiate, inconsistencies exist between objective economic outcomes and negotiator satisfaction. Although having more negotiable issues yields better objective payoffs, it can result in more thoughts about different possible outcomes. Such counterfactual thoughts about different outcomes can reduce overall satisfaction due to increased cognitive complexity and thoughts about different outcomes. In this study, we explore how information technology can influence negotiator satisfaction and better manage counterfactual thoughts and post-negotiation satisfaction. Results support the prediction that having a computer aid to better manage cognitively complex issues, even a relatively simple one, reduces participants’ counterfactual thoughts about better possible outcomes. As a result, the use of some type of technology—even a simple technology such as a spreadsheet—may improve overall negotiator satisfaction, while maintaining desirable economic outcomes.