Browsing by Subject "Emotionen in Verhandlungen"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1

Kooperation oder Konfrontation? Die Wirkung von Commitment, Empowerment, Emotion und Kritik in Verhandlung und Mediation
(2019) Hartmann-Piraudeau, Andrea; Brettschneider, Frank
The present work examines the effects of commitment, empowerment, anger, happiness and criticism by means of computer-based negotiation in the laboratory. In negotiation and mediation research, only a few experimental studies exist on the mechanisms of these conditions or interventions in a negotiation context with a mediator or a mediating third party. Usually, the results of experimental negotiation studies are based on classical two-party negotiations. With the research question of how the interventions of a mediator affect the negotiation process and the selected topics commitment, empowerment, emotions and criticism, a scientific contribution to the research of the effect of media-tion should be made. This is relevant because conflicts in society are less and less resolved by power. This development can be seen in different fields of social life In the first part of the work, mediation and negotiation are described as procedures for dealing with conflicts of interest and their similarities and differences are worked out. The state of research on the mechanisms of mediation in general and specifically on the research topics of Commitment, Empowerment, Emotions and Critique forms the theoretical basis of the work. Subsequently, the specific experimental conditions are discussed and the extent to which the negotiation situation in the laboratory can be transferred to the mediation context is worked out. 186 participants took part in the negotiation and were then questioned by questionnaire. The effects of the different test conditions on the willingness to cooperate, the agreement rate, the evaluation of the negotiating partner, the emotions experienced during the negotiation and the evaluation of the mediator were examined. The negotiating movements of the individual groups were compared against two reference groups and evaluated according to the principle of "match and mismatch" (Pruitt and Syna 1985; Benton et al. 1972). There were statistically significant differences between the experimental groups: All in all, those groups that were confronted with anger or criticism agreed faster. In the case of the condition "anger", concessions - analogous to previous attempts (without mediator) - can be seen as a strategic approach. The anger of the negotiating partner was evaluated by the test persons as an indication of their negotiating limits. In order to avoid an escalation or even a break, the participants reacted with concessions, even if they were not happy and felt negative. If the mediator criticised the course of the negotiations, a similar effect resulted: the participants in this group reached agreement more frequently than in other groups. However, the motivation for the concession was not based on strategic considerations, but on the uncertainty triggered by the mediators intervention, and was accompanied by strong negative emotions of its own, which were projected onto all participants. Below-average cooperative behaviour and below-average agreement rates indicate the experimental conditions of "confidence" and "empowerment". The difference between the two conditions lies above all in the emotion experienced and the assessment of the negotiating partner. If the test persons were given "confidence" by their negotiating partner, they reacted in an above-average good mood, little anxious and confident and found their negotiating partner sympathetic and cheerful. In the "Empowerment" group, the mediator induced his own encouraging comments. In addition to the restrained cooperation, these triggered a rather average emotional response, and the mediator was rated as "unhelpful". The analysis shows that the test persons interpreted the confidence of the negotiating partner analogously to the condition "anger" as a sign of his satisfaction with the progress of the negotiation. Accordingly, they saw no strategic necessity to show increased cooperation. In the empowerment of the mediator, the restraint is also based on the fact that the mediator as an external third party evaluates the progress positively. This is interpreted as an indication that there is no danger of escalation or abortion in the room and that the situation does not require increased concessions. However, the subjects were less positive in this condition and were more critical of the mediators intervention. There are indications that the test persons felt restricted in their self-determination. The test condition "Commitment" examines the effect on the demand of a written commitment of the test persons before the beginning of the negotiation. The agreement rate as well as the cooperation behaviour remained rather average. One conspicuous feature of the group analysed, however, is the high number of words used in the comments during the negotiation compared to the other groups. The request to write a first comment significantly increased the communicativeness in the course of the procedure and led to positive emotions among the test persons and an equally positive attribution of the negotiating partners. In addition to descriptive observation, data analysis and interpretation, recommendations for action in mediation practice were derived from the results for each group.