Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trust in Electronically Mediated Negotiations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Trust and Communication in a Digitized World

Part of the book series: Progress in IS ((PROIS))

Abstract

Interpersonal negotiations can be critically important. For instance, individuals negotiate central personal issues such as salaries or the division of labor, organizations negotiate consequential business deals, and political parties negotiate peace agreements. Notably, such negotiations are increasingly realized and supported by electronic communication media—for example by e-mail, telephone, or video-conferencing systems. Besides potential advantages such as decreased travel and opportunity costs, however, such electronically mediated negotiations are often characterized by low levels of trust among negotiators, which in turn might hamper the achievement of mutually beneficial (i.e., “Win–Win”) agreements in negotiations. This paper illuminates both the antecedents and consequences of trust in negotiations. While it is conducive to exchange information about one’s interests related to a negotiation to achieve mutually beneficial agreements, providing such information can render negotiators vulnerable to exploitation by their counterparts. Therefore, beneficial negotiation outcomes are facilitated by trust. First, we discuss whether and how trust is in fact helpful to achieving mutually satisfactory negotiation agreements. We then focus on the potential effects of electronic communication on trust at the bargaining table. We conclude with psychological strategies that might support trust in (electronically mediated) negotiations, helping people to gauge the potential of negotiations as consequential form of social interaction.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2015). Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis on virtuality as a moderator of the relationship between trust and team effectiveness. Manuscript under review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curhan, J. R., Elfenbein, H. A., & Xu, H. (2006). What do people value when they negotiate? Mapping the domain of subjective value in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 493–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.3.493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., Beersma, B., Stroebe, K., & Euwema, M. C. (2006). Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 927–943. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.6.927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2012). The common ingroup identity model. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 439–457). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., & Rust, M. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 1–26. doi:10.1080/14792779343000004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galin, A., Gross, M., & Gosalker, G. (2007). E-negotiation versus face-to-face negotiation what has changed–if anything? Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 787–797. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Young, N. C. J., Vartiainen, M., & Hakonen, M. (2015). Virtual teams research: 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of Management, 41, 1313–1337. doi:10.1177/0149206314559946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunia, B. C., Brett, J. M., Nandkeolyar, A. K., & Kamdar, D. (2011). Paying a price: Culture, trust, and negotiation consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 774–789. doi:10.1037/a0021986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 69–95. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertel, G., Schroer, J., Batinic, B., & Naumann, S. (2008). Do shy people prefer to send e-mail?: Personality effects on communication media preferences in threatening and nonthreatening situations. Social Psychology, 39, 231–243. doi:10.1027/1864-9335.39.4.231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 575–604. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilbert, M., & López, P. (2011). The world’s technological capacity to store, communicate, and compute information. Science, 332, 60–65. doi:10.1126/science.1200970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kong, D. T., Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2014). Interpersonal trust within negotiations: Meta-analytic evidence, critical contingencies, and directions for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 57, 1235–1255. doi:10.5465/amj.2012.0461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtzberg, T. R., Naquin, C. E., & Belkin, L. Y. (2009). Humor as a relationship-building tool in online negotiations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 20, 377–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734. doi:10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. A., Kurtzberg, T. R., & Thompson, L. L. (1999). Long and short routes to success in electronically mediated negotiations: Group affiliations and good vibrations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 22–43. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M., Nadler, J., Kurtzberg, T. R., & Thompson, L. L. (2002). Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 89–100. doi:10.1037//1089-2699.6.1.89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naquin, C. E., & Paulson, G. D. (2003). Online bargaining and interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 113–120. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2002). Behavior online: Does anonymous computer communication reduce gender inequality? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1073–1083. doi:10.1177/01461672022811006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 25, 689–715. doi:10.1177/009365098025006006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G. (1998). Social conflict. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 470–503). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purdy, J. M., Nye, P., & Balakrishnan, P. V. (2000). The impact of communication media on negotiation outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 162–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404. doi:10.5465/AMR.1998.926617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2007). Social psychology. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Citera, M. (2005). Hostile behavior and profit in virtual negotiation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 69–93. doi:10.1007/s10869-005-6984-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.33.020182.000245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L. (1990). Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 515–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L. (1991). Information exchange in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 161–179. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(91)90020-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L. (2009). The mind and heart of the negotiator. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L., & Hastie, R. (1990). Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 98–123. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(90)90048-E.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L., & Nadler, J. (2002). Negotiating via information technology: Theory and application. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 109–124. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L., Wang, J., & Gunia, B. C. (2010). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 491–515. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead, A. S. (2004). The interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 57–76. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. M., Straus, S. G., & McEvily, B. (2006). All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 16–33. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany

    Jens Mazei

  2. University of Münster, Münster, Germany

    Guido Hertel

Authors
  1. Jens Mazei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guido Hertel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jens Mazei or Guido Hertel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Münster, Münster, Germany

    Bernd Blöbaum

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mazei, J., Hertel, G. (2016). Trust in Electronically Mediated Negotiations. In: Blöbaum, B. (eds) Trust and Communication in a Digitized World. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28059-2_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation