Flying bagels and social graces : The impact of strategic expressions of emotion on distrust and post settlement behavior

Strategic emotion can be used as a negotiation tactic to extract value from one’s opponent. Previous research findings have found that the use of this tactic can influence not only the amount of value claimed, but post-negotiation behaviors. However, interacting with an opponent who possesses power based on their alternative to an agreement can halt the amount of value claimed. Individuals with more power (i.e. a better BATNA) are less likely to concede and more likely to make attempts to earn more points or money for themselves. While interacting, these variables – use of strategic emotion and level of power – produce perceptions that may alter not only the negotiated outcomes, but what occurs post-hoc after the contract has been negotiated. This experiment examined these effects – the influence of power and the strategic use of emotion – on economic outcomes within a negotiation as well as post-negotiation behavior. Despite prior research findings, our results fail to replicate the influence of emotion on value claimed – angry participants do not claim more value but does influence post-negotiation behaviors.