Get angry, get out: The interpersonal effects of anger communication in multiparty negotiation

By Ilja van Beest, Gerben A. van Kleef, Eric van Dijk. 2008

90 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Research on multiparty negotiation has investigated how parties form coalitions to secure payoffs but has not addressed how emotions may affect such coalition decisions. Extending research on bilateral negotiations which has generally argued that it is beneficial to communicate anger, we argue that it constitutes a considerable risk when there are more than two people present at the negotiation table. Using a computer-mediated coalition game we show that communicating anger is a risky strategy in multiparty bargaining. The main findings of three studies were that participants: (1) form negative impressions of players who communicate anger and therefore (2) exclude such players from coalitions and from obtaining a payoff share, but (3) make considerable concessions on those rare occasions that they choose to form a coalition with an angry player, or (4) when they had to form a coalition with an angry player. We discuss the implications of these results for theorizing on emotions, negotiations, and coalition formation.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1f8f857fd7b54b062f0c07c1be7b0291a8def7ce

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Understanding the positive and negative effects of emotional expressions in organizations: EASI does it (2014, background): “In several studies, negotiators who were confronted with an angry opponent developed a negative impression of the opponent (Van Beest et al., 2008; Van Kleef et al., 2004a), became angry themselves (Friedman et al., 2004; Van Kleef et al., 2004a), and were unwilling to interact with the opponent…”
An interpersonal approach to emotion in social decision making: the emotions as social information model (2010, methodology): “Initial evidence for this idea was provided by the negotiation study by Van Kleef and colleagues (2004a) described above.”
Emotional influence at work: Take it EASI (2012, unknown): “Another study revealed that angry negotiators stand a greater risk of being excluded from a profitable coalition due to the unfavorable impressions that they make (Van Beest et al., 2008).”
Emotion is for influence (2011, unknown): “Some studies used verbal expressions of emotion (eg, Adam et al, 2010 ; Friedman et al, 2004 ; Heerdink et al, 2011 ; Sinaceur, Van Kleef, Neale, Adam, & Haag, 2011 ; Steinel et al, 2008 ; Van Beest et al, 2008 ; Van Dijk et al, 2008 ; Van Kleef, De Dreu, & Manstead, 2004a , 2004b ; Van Kle”