Abstract
This article explores the potential of interaction, conversation and discourse analyses of functions and manifestation of emotion in group decision and negotiation (GDN). It uses authentic data representing different kinds of GDN activities and aims to increase the understanding of the role of emotion not only in face-to-face interaction but also in artificial intelligence models of GDN. The study concludes that although emotion is a subjective psycho-somatic experience it can be fruitfully and reliably studied by diverse interaction, conversation and discourse analysis methods and thus shows and explores its intersubjective realization in GDN. The paper finds that specific linguistic manifestations of emotional dominance (flattery, sarcasm, ridicule, aggression etc.) function as strategic means for negotiation on different levels of awareness—from lexical choices to tones of voice and paralinguistic expressions. The study suggests that dialog management models of communicative acts need to be defined not only in terms of pragmatic meaning and intention but also in terms of emotion, i.e., emotions have more prominent influence on illocutionary force than acknowledged (Allwood in Linguistic communication as action and cooperation. Gothenburg Monographs in Linguistics 2. Department of Linguistics, University of Göteborg, 1976; Allwood in Collaboration, cooperation, and conflict in dialog systems. Proceedings of the IjCAI-97 workshop on collaboration, cooperation and conflict in dialog systems, Nagoya, 1997; Bell in Linguistic adaptation in spoken human–computer dialogs. Doctoral thesis, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm, 2003). Furthermore, the paper suggests that discursive mechanisms such as Reciprocal Adaptation realize as Interactive Alignment or/and Complex Cognitive Processing the emotion aspects of which have different effects on Problem Reframing and Problem Solution, i.e., the type of activity interlocutors involved in predicts the functionality of Emotive Reciprocal Adaptation. It finds, for instance, that in plea bargains, Interactive Alignment realizes Complex Theory of Mind (ToM)-based Reasoning in all stages of the activity. In informal empathy exchanges, such reasoning is manifested in the later phases of the process. Based on empirical analysis of face-to-face GDN data, the paper presents a new version of a model of dynamic re-interpretation and re-contextualization of negotiation, MEND (Modeling Emotion in Negotiation and Decision making), according to which emotions contribute to the changes of goals and strategies during negotiation. In the MEND model, emotion is a process that regulates Interactive Alignment and the ToM models, which interactants build of each other’s goals, states, tactics, and strategies. The operationalization of the model relates adjacent turns and utterances to updates of ToM strategies, transactive and interactive goals, tactics, and interpretations of emotion, either on primary or on appraisal and coping level. It uses a typical example of an emotion, which requires adoption of other’s goals, namely, empathy. The traditional idea of win–win, win–lose, and lose–lose negotiation types is put into perspective where these processes are seen as dynamic re-conditioning of negotiation by changes of ToM models driven by emotions. Besides being a cognitive and neural process, emotion is a joint interactive effort in which speakers reciprocally communicate and reformulate the legitimacy of their experiences, values, and attitudes.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allwood, J. (1976). Linguistic communication as action and cooperation. Gothenburg Monographs in Linguistics 2. Department of Linguistics, University of Göteborg.
Allwood, J. (1996). Some comments on Wallace Chafe’s “How consciousness shapes language”. Pragmatics and Cognition, 4(1).
Allwood, J. (1997). Notes on dialogue and cooperation. In K. Jokinen, D. Sadek & D. Traum (Eds.), Collaboration, cooperation and conflict in dialogue systems. Proceedings of the IjCAI-97 Workshop on Collaboration, Cooperation and Conflict in Dialogue Systems, Nagoya.
Bell, L. (2003). Linguistic adaptation in spoken human–computer dialogues. Doctoral Thesis, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm.
Bussman, S., & Muller, J. (1992). A negotiation framework for co-operating agents. In S. M. Deen (Ed.), Proceedings of CKBS-SIG (pp. 1–17). Dake Centre, University of Keele.
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cornelius, R. R. (2000). Theoretical approaches to emotion. In Proceedings from ISCA Workshop on Speech and Emotion: A Conceptual Framework for Research.
Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Putnam Publishing.
Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Madison, WI: Brown and Benchmark.
Dohonue, W. A., & Roberto, A. J. (1993). Relational development as negotiated order in hostage negotiation. Human Communication Research, 20, 175–198.
Donohue, W. A. (2001). Resolving relational paradox: The language of conflict in relationships. In W. F. Eadie & P. E. Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict resolution (pp. 21–46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
Eysenck, S. B. G. (1981). Impulsive and antisocial behavior in children. Current Psychological Research, 1, 31–37.
Fuslier, G. D. (1988). Hostage negotiation consultant: Emerging role for the clinical psychologist. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 175–179.
Fuster, J. M. (2003). Cortex and mind: Unifying cognition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gilbert, M. A. (1995). Emotional argumentation, or, why do argumentation rheorists argue with their mates? In Analysis and Evaluation: Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation (Vol. II).
Givón, T. (2005). Context as other minds: The pragmatics of sociality, cognition and communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction rituals: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Pantheon.
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. (1987). Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assessments. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics, 1(1), 1–52.
Gordon, R. (1986). Folk psychology as simulation. Mind and Language, 1, 158–170.
Gumpertz, J. J. (1982). Discoursive Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (2005). Empathic moments. California: Talk at UCLA.
Hobbs, J., & Gordon, A. (2005). Encoding knowledge of commonsense psychology. In 7th International Symposium on Logical Formalizations of Commonsense Reasoning, 22–24 May 2005, Corfu, Greece.
Hogan, R. T. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 33, 307–316.
Iacoboni, M. (2005). Understanding others: Imitation, language, empathy. In S. Hurley & N. Chater (Eds.), Perspectives on imitation: From cognitive neuroscience to social science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jefferson, G., Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. (1987). Notes on laughter in the pursuit of intimacy. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 152–205). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. The Journal of Business, 59(4). Part 2: The behavioral foundations of economic theory (October, 1986, pp. S251–S278).
Kraus, S. (2001). Strategic negotiation in multiagent environment. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Lazarus, R. (1999). Stress and emotion. New York: Springer.
Martinovski, B. (2000). Repetitions and reformulations in court proceedings—a comparison of Sweden and Bulgaria. Gothenburg Monographs in Linguistics. Department of Linguistics. Goteborg University, Goteborg.
Martinovski, B. (2006). Cognitive and emotive empathy in discourse. In Proceedings of CogSci 2006, Vancouver, Canada.
Martinovski, B. (2007). Empathy and theory of mind and body in evolution. In E. Ahlsén, et al. (Eds.), Communication—action—meaning. A festschrift to Jens Allwood (pp. 343–361). Department of Linguistics, University of Gothenburg.
Martinovski, B. (2007). Shifting attention as re-contextualization in negotiation. In Proceedings of GDN, Montreal.
Martinovski, B. (2010). Emotion in negotiation. In M. Kilgour & C. Eden (Eds.), Handbook on group decision and negotiation. Amsterdam: Springer.
Martinovski, B. (2011). Reciprocal adaptation and emotion in conflict transformation. In Proceedings of International Conference in Conflict Resolution, Istanbul, Turkey.
Martinovski, B., & Mao, W. (2009). Emotion as an argumentation engine: Modeling the role of emotion in negotiation. Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation, 18(3).
Martinovski, B., & Marsella, S. (2003), Dynamic reconstruction of selfhood: Coping processes in discourse. In Proceedings of Joint International Conference on Cognitive Science, Sydney.
Martinovski, B., & Traum, D. (2003). The error is the clue: Breakdown in human–machine interaction. In Proceedings of ISCA Tutorial and Research Workshop International Speech Communication Association, Switzerland.
Martinovski, B., Traum, D., & Marsella, S. (2007). Rejection of empathy in negotiation. Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation, 16(1).
McCarty, L. T. (1997). Some arguments about legal arguments. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law.
Mead, G. H. (1993). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Morton, A. (1980). Frames of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Myers, G. E. (2001). William James: His life and thought. London: Yale University Press.
Parsons, S., Sierra, C., & Jennings, N. R. (1998). Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation, 8(3), 261–292.
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2006). Alignment as the basis for successful communication. Research on Language and Computation, 4, 203–228.
Powell, J. O. (1989). Negotiation processes in hostage and barricaded incidents. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Iowa.
Prakken, H. (2005). AI & Law, logic and argument schemes. Argumentation, 19, 303–320. (special issue on The Toulmin Model Today).
Prakken, H., & Sartor, G. (2002). The role of logic in computational models of legal argument. In A. Kakas & F. Sadri (Eds.), Computational logic: Logic programming and beyond, essays in honor of Robert A. Kowalski (Part II, pp. 342–380). Berlin: Springer.
Reik, T. (1949). Listening with the third ear: The inner experience of the psychoanalyst. New York: Grove.
Rogan, R.G. (1999). F.I.R.E.: A communication-based approach for understanding crisis negotiation. In O. Adang & E. Giebels (Eds.), To save lives: Proceedings of the first European conference on hostage negotiations (pp. 25–42). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Salem, R. (1982). Community dispute resolution through outside intervention. Peace and Change Journal, VIII(2/3).
Scherer, K. R. (1993). Neuroscience projections to current debates in emotion psychology. Cognition and Emotion, 7, 1–41.
Stephan, W. G., & Finlay, K. (1999). The role of empathy in improving intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 729–743.
Stich, S., & Nichols, S. (1992), Folk psychology: Simulation or tacit theory? Mind and Language, 7, 35–71.
Taylor, P. (2002). A cylindrical model of communication behavior in crisis negotiation. Human Communication Research, 28, 7–48.
Thagard, P. (2000). Coherence in thought and action. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Toris, C. (1994). A negotiation model of empathy. In 9th International Balint Federation Congress, November 9–13, Charleston, South Carolina.
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. London: Cambridge University Press.
Traum, D. (1994). A computational theory of grounding in natural language conversation. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester.
Traum, D., Rickel, J., Gratch, J., & Stacy, M. (2003). Negotiation over tasks in hybrid human–agent teams for simulation-based training. In Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialected approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Von Uexkull, J., & Kriszat, G. (1934). Streifzuge durch die Umwelten Von Tieren und Menschen. Ein Bilderbuch unsichtbarer Welten. Berlin: Springer.
Walton, D. N. (1989). Informal logic: A handbook for critical argumentation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. N. (1992). The place of emotion in argument. The Pennsylvania State U.P., University Park, PA.
Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Acknowledgments
The author of this chapter wishes to thank Douglas Maynard and John Heritage for kindly providing data, Wenji Mao, David Traum, and Stacy Marsella for allowing the use of common research results, Rudolf Vetschera for invaluable comments, and Melvin Shakun for confident support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Martinovsky, B. (2015). Discourse Analysis of Emotion in Face-to-Face Group Decision and Negotiation. In: Martinovsky, B. (eds) Emotion in Group Decision and Negotiation. Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9963-8_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9963-8_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9962-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9963-8
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)