CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

100 OLEKALNS, PUTNAM, WEINGART, AND METCALF
Compared with U.S. buyers, Japanese buyers show a higher participation
rate and are willing to pay more when the product information is available
as a picture rather than as a verbal (text) description (Vishwanath, 2003).
Consistent with a greater concern for face, Koreans are not only more likely
than U.S. participants to accompany SPAM with an apology; they also view
SPAM as more credible when an apology occurs (Park, Lee, & Song, 2005).
Even though these findings did not focus on negotiation or conflict resolution,
they suggested the potential for computer-mediated communication
to magnify the cultural differences in negotiation. Conversely, the ability
to spend time processing information and composing responses may offset
the disadvantages that come with negotiating in a nonnative language.
Emotion plays a big role in the analysis of computer-mediated communication.
Given that mediated communication can filter cues, it seems logical
that disputants would be more careful in expressing emotions in this
context rather than in face-to-face interactions. Research, however, reveals
the opposite pattern in that individuals significantly overestimate their
abilities to convey emotions via e-mail. Disputants often think they are
more competent in cueing the other party than they actually are (Kruger,
Epley, Parger, & Ng, 2005). Research suggested that the value of expressing
emotions is limited, especially if the tone of the interaction is already
negative. Thompsen and Foulger (1996) demonstrated that the use of
direct emotional expressions could reduce the perception of flaming, but
only when disputants have low levels of hostility. More recently, Walthier
and D’Addario (2001) revealed that individuals give greater weight to the
verbal content of messages than they do to the expression of emotions.
However, if either the verbal content or the emotions express negativity,
this orientation dominates interpretation of the entire message. Given the
potential for emotional language to escalate disputes and slow resolution
(Brett et al., 2007; Friedman et al., 2004), a critical area for future research
is investigating how disputants can signal their emotions and intentions
to the other party effectively.
A third area in which technology influences negotiation is work on
dispute resolution. Since computer-mediated communication typically
reduces social cues, parties are left trying to infer the other disputant’s
intentions based on their words alone (Friedman & Currall, 2003; Kiesler,
Seigel, & McGuire, 1984; Ramirez, Walther, Burgoon, & Sunnafrank, 2002).
Individuals appear to recognize this pattern and engage in higher levels
of uncertainty reduction (Tidwell & Walther, 2002). The impact of such
behaviors, however, is not clear. Although Moore, Kurtzberg, Thompson,
and Morris (1999) noted that sharing basic personal information via email
improved negotiators’ outcomes, negative impressions and low trust
may still abound in the world of computer-mediated communication.
Compared with participants in face-to-face negotiations, individuals who
engage in computer-mediated bargaining perceive both the negotiation
and the other party more negatively (Fischer-Lokou & Guéguen, 2001;
Fischer-Lokou, Guéguen, & Lépy, 2004). Moreover, individuals in com-