of an advantage do you think you have in this negotiation?”. They concluded the experiment by indicating feelings of similarity, liking, and trust toward the counterpart. We combined participants’ responses to the questions addressing feelings of advantage into a single (α = .78). Feelings of advantage were uncorrelated with counterpart’s feelings of advantage (r = .00, > .95), so we analyzed the data at the individual level. We then p conducted 1 x 3 information (no information vs. NDI vs. DI) ANOVAs examining the effect of information on feelings of advantage, trust, similarity, and liking. The overall F-statistic for feelings of advantage was significant, F(2,57) = 3.34, p = .04. As predicted, negotiators receiving NDI felt as though they possessed an advantage (M = 4.76, = 1.13) relative to negotiators in SD the control condition (M = 4.03, = 1.16), =2.20, = .03, = .63. The same was true for SD t(57) p d negotiators possessing DI (M = 4.79, = 0.81), =2.28, = .03, = .76. We also tested SD t(57) p d whether NDI could affect negotiators’ concern for their counterparts either positively or negatively; however, measures of trust, liking, and similarity were not affected by condition, all >.15. p’s Experiment 1 In Experiment 1 we explored whether negotiators with NDI and DI exchanged less information with their counterparts. We also explored whether the reduced information exchange impaired negotiation outcomes for negotiators possessing NDI. Method A total of 154 students (54% female; Mage = 21) Participants and Experimental Design. participated in the negotiation exercise for $12. We crossed negotiator role instructions with power (high power vs. low power). There were three types of dyads: dyads in which one negotiator possessed NDI about the counterpart; dyads in which one negotiator possessed DI
of an advantage do you think you have in this negotiation?”. They concluded the experiment by indicating feelings of similarity, liking, and trust toward the counterpart. We combined participants’ responses to the questions addressing feelings of advantage into a single (α = .78). Feelings of advantage were uncorrelated with counterpart’s feelings of advantage (r = .00, p > .95), so we analyzed the data at the individual level. We then conducted 1 x 3 information (no information vs. NDI vs. DI) ANOVAs examining the effect of information on feelings of advantage, trust, similarity, and liking. The overall F-statistic for feelings of advantage was significant, F(2,57) = 3.34, p = .04. As predicted, negotiators receiving NDI felt as though they possessed an advantage (M = 4.76, SD = 1.13) relative to negotiators in the control condition (M = 4.03, SD = 1.16), t(57) =2.20, p = .03, d = .63. The same was true for negotiators possessing DI (M = 4.79, SD = 0.81), t(57) =2.28, p = .03, d = .76. We also tested whether NDI could affect negotiators’ concern for their counterparts either positively or negatively; however, measures of trust, liking, and similarity were not affected by condition, all p’s >.15. Experiment 1 In Experiment 1 we explored whether negotiators with NDI and DI exchanged less information with their counterparts. We also explored whether the reduced information exchange impaired negotiation outcomes for negotiators possessing NDI. Method Participants and Experimental Design. A total of 154 students (54% female; Mage = 21) participated in the negotiation exercise for $12. We crossed negotiator role instructions with power (high power vs. low power). There were three types of dyads: dyads in which one negotiator possessed NDI about the counterpart; dyads in which one negotiator possessed DI
TMI%20Draft1-1.docx