What is the Effect of Pace of Speech on Negotiation Outcomes and is this Effect Mediated by Perceived Competence?

(1)

What is the Effect of Pace of Speech on Negotiation Outcomes and

is this Effect Mediated by Perceived Competence?

Thesis BSc Business Administration University of Amsterdam

Name: Iris Beeren

Student number:10719210 Supervisor: Tina Dudenhöffer Date: 22nd_{of June, 2020.}

(2)

2

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Student Iris Julia Beeren who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.

I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.

The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.

(3)

3

Table of Content

Statement of Originality ... 2 Abstract ... 5 1. Introduction ... 6 2. Theoretical framework ... 8 2.1 Business negotiations ... 8 2.1.1 Negotiation outcomes ... 9 2.2 Pace ... 10

2.2.1 Effects of pace on negotiation outcomes ... 11

2.3 Perceived competence ... 12

2.3.1 Effects of perceived competence on negotiation outcomes ... 13

2.3.2 Effects of pace on perceived competence... 14

2.4 Synthesis ... 15 4. Method ... 16 4.1 Design ... 16 4.2 Participants ... 16 4.3 Procedure ... 16 4.4 Materials ... 17 4.5 Analytical plan ... 19 5. Results ... 20 5.1 Descriptive data ... 20 5.2 Standardization checks ... 20

(4)

4 5.3 Hypothesis 1 ... 21 5.4 Hypothesis 2 ... 22 5.5 Exploratory analysis... 23 6. Discussion ... 25 6.1 General discussion ... 25 6.2 Theoretical implications ... 27 6.3 Practical implications ... 28

6.4 Limitations and suggestions for future research ... 28

6.5 Conclusion ... 30 7. Bibliography ... 31 Appendix 1: SPSS output ... 34 Descriptives participants ... 34 Age:... 34 Gender: ... 35 Hypothesis 1: ... 36 Hypothesis 2: ... 37 Exploratory analysis ... 38

Reliability analysis Perceived competence scale ... 39

(5)

5

Abstract

The voice can be used to obtain desired outcomes because it influences the perception of individuals. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of pace of speech on negotiation outcomes and whether this effect was mediated by perceived competence. In addition, some exploratory personality characteristics were included with the aim to get more insights. To examine the effect, an experimental between-subjects design was carried out with two conditions and one time of measurement. The sample consisted of 113 participants who were randomly assigned to either the low or high pace group. The results showed that on a a = .10 level, the negotiation outcome was significantly higher in the high pace group

compared to the low pace group. In addition, no mediation of perceived competence was found. Also, the exploratory factors did not provide more insights. Therefore, based on this study, it is assumed that using high pace of speech in a business negotiation is beneficial for the height of the negotiation outcome. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution because of the significance level. Therefore, it is recommended to further study the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes to be able to formulate a more substantive theory.

(6)

6

1. Introduction

Millions of organizations are involved in business negotiations every day. In recent years, business negotiation processes have been changing fast due to the rising complexity and the rapid changes in demands (Wang, 2017). This is mostly caused by globalization and thus the international context. In order to respond to these changes more efficiently and effectively, a strategy to help enlarge negotiation outcomes is needed.

Evidence is found that numerous factors play an influence on how people reach higher negotiation outcomes compared to other parties. Next to verbal and non-verbal behavior, also paralinguistic factors play an important role in how the other is perceived (Van Zant & Berger, 2019; Semnani-Azad, & Adair, 2013). Psychologically seen, the tone of our voice expresses emotions and thus changes our thoughts, interpretations and our perceptions of actions of others (Scherer, Johnstone, & Klasmeyer, 2003; Naidoo, 2006). Much existing literature focuses on what individuals can say in order to reach desired negotiation outcomes. Yet, little research focused on how negotiators can regulate their voice in order to enhance the effectiveness of their emotional communication (Haag & Fresnel, 2015). Pace of speech in particular has not been studied widely in business negotiation environments while this voice characteristic can be trained easily.

The aim of this study is to provide empirical support for the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes. More specifically, it is expected that counterparts who speak in high pace obtain higher negotiation outcomes compared to counterparts who speak in low pace. Why this is expected is elaborated in the following chapter. Subsequently, it is researched whether perceived competence serves as an underlying mechanism for this effect. Thus, the question aimed to be answered is: What is the effect of pace of speech on negotiation outcomes and is this effect mediated by perceived competence?.

(7)

7 Both the practical and theoretical implications are highly relevant for this study. The effect of pace in negotiation settings specifically is not studied by prior research.

Nevertheless, the practical implications of these findings are highly relevant in negotiation settings. The pace of speech can easily be trained in order to use pace as a tool to obtain higher negotiation outcomes. Also, from a theoretical perspective, the implications are highly relevant because this study aims to extend existing knowledge in business negotiation

research. Firstly, existing knowledge about the effects of pace will be broadened to the negotiation context. Also, it is interesting to identify the underlying mechanisms thriving this effect and thus extend existing empirical support for the influence of perceived competence in business negotiation settings.

In the following, first a theoretical framework is presented which presents relevant information about the constructs of interest and hypothesis accordingly. After that, a conceptual model and the prior mentioned hypothesis will be presented. Then, the

methodology is discussed including information about the design, participants, materials, procedure and analysis. After, the empirical part of the research follows where the results are discussed. Lastly, a discussion follows which entails a discussion on the results, the

theoretical contributions, managerial implications, limitations and suggestions for future research.

(8)

8

2. Theoretical framework

This chapter provides a thorough overview of existing literature, both empirically proven and theoretical based, about the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes and the mediation of perceived competence explaining this effect. First, based on existing research, business negotiations and negotiation outcomes are defined. After that, pace is discussed in detail which is then followed by prior research which links pace to negotiation outcomes. Then, perceived competence is discussed and its effect on both pace and negotiation outcomes. Lastly, all constructs are combined in a synthesis where the conceptual model of the present study and the hypothesis are presented.

2.1 Business negotiations

Business negotiations are defined as a decision process where two or more parties try to influence each other through different means of communication with the purpose of achieving their own as well as common interests (Agndal, 2007). Negotiations are termed business negotiations when people carry out the negotiation in a professional setting. The most frequent situation occurring in business negotiations is a buyer-seller situation where one party is interested in goods or services of the other party (Agndal, 2007). Negotiations occur when there is at least more than one possible outcome in a situation where multiple parties have an interest, without having the knowledge of what the outcome will be (Pillutla & Nicholson, 2005). Negotiators most often try to obtain their highest possible outcome without harming their counterpart in order to build a sustainable long-term relationship. Before the negotiation starts the individual needs to consider what they want to gain from the negotiation by making goals. Goals are defined as the needs, wants and preferences that negotiators have (Pillutla & Nicholson, 2005).

(9)

9

2.1.1 Negotiation outcomes

An outcome is characterized by a possible result of a negotiation. There are three possible outcome distributions of negotiations (Kersten, 2001). Firstly, there are integrative

negotiations which are characterized by win-win situations in which both parties come to an agreement that satisfies both goals. The dominant strategy here is to collaborate, share

information and solve problems mutually. Secondly, there are distributive negotiations which are characterized by win-lose situations. The dominant strategy here is to bargain hard only benefiting your own interest. These situations are identified as an agreement in which only one of the parties satisfy their goals and the other does not. Lastly, a situation can occur in which both parties come to an inefficient but equitable outcome. In this case, all of the items are divided equally between the parties (Kersten, 2001).

In addition, outcomes can be classified into types (Agndal, 2007). Outcomes can be either general or specific, objective or subjective and lastly absolute or relative. Objective outcomes are usually economic in nature, for example a measure of individual gain or bargaining power. On the contrary, subjective outcomes withhold satisfaction about the outcome or the process (Conlon & Shelton Hunt, 2002). Another outcome measure is the efficiency of the negotiation. Important factors to consider are the length of the negotiation and the number of iterations (Agndal, 2007).

2.1.2 First offer

This study will focus on a distributive negotiation outcome situation where the outcome is measured in an objective manner. Much empirical support is found for a relationship between the first offer and a final negotiation outcome. Negotiation outcomes are influenced by reference points (Blount, Thomas-Hunt, & Neale, 1996). Research by Galinsky and Mussweiler (2001) provided theoretical support for the fact that the first offer serves as a

(10)

10 strong predictor of the final negotiation outcome. They also found that nonetheless of who initiated the first offer, this effect was valid. This effect is explained by an anchoring effect (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). When people have little information available about the other party, people tend to base their judgements on availableheuristics (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). This is a judgement bias which in this case results in a certain negotiation outcome (Galinsky & Mussweiler, 2001). When a first offer is set high for example, this offer will serve as an anchor for the other party to make a counteroffer in the same range as the initial offer and thus predict the height of the final outcome.

In addition, research by Van Poucke and Buelens (2002) found empirical support for the preposition that the first offer is a strong predictor for the negotiation result. They found that the initial offer explained 50% of the variance in the final price. Because prior research indicates that the first offer serves as a strong predictor for the final negotiation result, in this study the first offer will be considered as the negotiation outcome.

2.2 Pace

The voice can be used as an instrument to express emotions while communicating and thus change perceptions both consciously and unconsciously (Scherer et al., 2003; Naidoo, 2006). Also, in business negotiation contexts this is applicable and highly relevant because

counterparts base their offer on perceptions of the counterpart. Voice can be distinguished into six characteristics (Haag & Fresnel, 2015). Register refers to the tone ranges we use while speaking which can be from the nose or from the chest. Timbre determines how smooth, warm and rich a voice is perceived. Prosody is the rhythm and sounds variation in which people speak. Pace determines how fast people speak. Voice pitch refers to the perception of the height of the voice which is characterized by the frequency of the soundwave. Lastly, volume refers to the loudness in which people speak. All of these

(11)

11 characteristics influence our perception on how we process and interpret information

(Dudenhöffer, 2020). Thus, it is interesting to research how people can use their voice to be obtain desired outcomes.

This study will only consider the effects of pace. Much research has focused on what pace is perceived to be either fast or slow. Pace is measured in words per minute and whether it is perceived as fast or slow varies per context.

2.2.1 Effects of pace on negotiation outcomes

The aim of business negotiations is to obtain concessions from the other party in order to reach a higher outcome and the use of voice is an important instrument in this process because of the psychological processes behind it (Agndal, 2007; Haag & Fresnel, 2015). Prior research found inconsistent support for whether low or high pace would lead to more positive

outcomes. It is known that an individual who talks in a fast pace is perceived to be more persuasive than a person who talks more slowly. The unconscious process thriving that perception is that the speed of speaking is mirrored by the speed of thinking (Nasher, 2018). Thus, it is assumed that individuals who speak fast, also think fast. This effect is also known as a credibility cue effect (Smith & Schaffer, 1995). This implicates that speaking in a high pace is seen as an indicator of an intelligent and knowledgeable speaker (Miller, Maruyama, Beaber, & Valone, 1976; as cited in Smith et al., 1995). Another explanation could be that fast speech is associated with more attention and thus could be more effective in changing perception or behavior (LaBarbera & Maclachlan, 1979). On the contrary, authoritative speakers usually speak with a low pace and tactical pauses to convince their audience (Van Zant, & Berger, 2019; Sorokowski et al., 2019). This would indicate that in fact low pace would be favorable over fast speech.

(12)

12 Also, it is empirically proven that the speed of speech has contradictory results (Miller et al., 1976; Smith & Schaffer, 1995). Both studies found that people tend to fail to

discriminate between strong and weak statements when people speak in a fast pace, people perceived fast pace as more persuasive but also perceived fast pace as less source credible. Both researches were conducted in a private environment so it is interesting to investigate whether this result holds for business negotiations. Pace is not studied in a business

negotiation setting by prior research. The practical implications of potential findings could be highly relevant in business negotiations. The pace of speech can easily be trained in order to use pace as a tool to obtain higher negotiation outcomes. In negotiation settings it is important to be perceived as persuasive and knowledgeable (Maraavi, Ganzach, &Pazy, 2011). Linking this to prior research (Miller et al., 1976; Smith et al, 1995), this results in the first hypothesis:

H1: In business negotiations, persons who speak with a high pace obtain higher negotiation

outcomes compared to persons who speak with a low pace.

2.3 Perceived competence

Some studies have researched underlying mechanisms of why certain voice characteristics are related to more positive outcomes. One underlying mechanism could be perceived

competence (Klofstad, Anderson, & Nowicki, 2015). Perceived competence is defined as either the self-perception of an individual or the perception of another individual in their capabilities and ability to control their environment and situation (Marsch, Martin, Yeung, Craven, 2016). This is not the actual competence but only the perception of competence. The self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) proposes that human beings have a basic psychological need for autonomy, competence and relatedness. Psychologically seen, the perceived competence of the other can both consciously and unconsciously change behavior.

(13)

13

2.3.1 Effects of perceived competence on negotiation outcomes

Following the expectation states theory (Berger, Wagner, & Zelditch, 1985), people generate expectations on how the counterpart will behave and perform. Based on these expectations about the counterpart, persons behave and respond differently. In a business negotiation context specifically, these expectations could determine how high the first offer is staked (Miles & Clenney, 2010). Individuals base these expectations based on both unique

information applicable to the counterpart and so-called diffuse status characteristics. Diffuse status characteristics are known as superficial characteristics of individuals that are both associated with status and perceived competence in society (Miles & Clenney, 2010). Examples of these characteristics are gender, education, ethnicity or physical attractiveness. These characteristics elicit implicit associations within individuals and therefore shape expectations of the other (Berger & Fisek, 2006). Even though it is very interesting to research which characteristics are associated with perceived competence it is not directly relevant for this study. What is important, is that based on the expectation states theory (Berger et al., 1985) it is assumed that persons who are perceived to be more competent, also reach higher outcomes. Expectations which are related to perceived competence thus shape outcomes. For business negotiations specifically, perceived competence has been found to have an influence on whether the other party is perceived as convincing (Klofstad et al., 2015). The expectation states theory (Berger et al., 1985) could explain the link between perceived competence and negotiation outcomes. To see whether there is theoretical support for the whole mediating path, the link between pace and perceived competence is discussed in the following paragraph.

(14)

14

2.3.2 Effects of pace on perceived competence

The fact that higher pace is associated with higher perceived competence compared to low pace is empirically supported (Smith, Brown, Strong, & Rencher, 1975; Street Jr, Brady & Putman, 1983). Firstly, Research of Smith et al. (1975) has shown that people are perceived to be more competent as their rate of speech increases. They found a positive linear relationship between pace and competence. In their study, participants listened to multiple men speaking in different speeds, who represented various social and educational backgrounds. To control for confounding factors, the voices were simulated on the computer. This finding was applicable to day-to-day settings so it is interesting to investigate whether this effect also applies in a business negotiation setting. Also, research of Street Jr et al. (1983) showed that people who speak in a moderate to high rate are perceived to be more competent. In addition to solely studying the effect of pace on competence, they also compared the findings to the pace of the participants their selves. They studied this because they expected that people might prefer to listen to persons who talk in similar speeds. They concluded that people assess persons who talk faster than their self as more competent than persons who talk slower or at the same rate. Again, this study was researched in a day-to-day setting. Therefore, it is interesting to investigate whether this translates to business negotiation contexts.

Both the link between pace and perceived competence and between competence and negotiation outcomes are outlined based on theoretical and experimental support. To investigate whether this link translates to a business negotiation context and whether

perceived competence serves as an underlying mechanism the following hypothesis has been formulated based on prior research:

H2: The effect between pace on negotiation outcomes will be mediated by perceived

(15)

15

2.4 Synthesis

All together, it can be concluded from the theoretical framework that further investigation of the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes is needed. Not solely to find empirical support for the existing claim but also to investigate whether perceived competence can be considered to be an underlying mechanism which explains why this effect exists. A visual representation of what this study investigates is presented in figure 1. This is shown in a conceptual model of this study. Also, the research question and hypotheses which are discussed in the theoretical framework are outlined again.

Figure 1. Conceptual model

The research question that rises from the conceptual framework is:

RQ: What is the effect of voice pace on negotiation outcomes and is this effect mediated by

perceived competence?

The hypotheses derived from the framework in order to answer the research question:

H1: In business negotiations, persons who speak with a high pace obtain higher negotiation

outcomes compared to persons who speak with a low pace.

H2: The effect between pace on negotiation outcomes will be mediated by perceived

(16)

16

4. Method 4.1 Design

The research design is a between-subjects experimental design with one measurement time and two conditions. Participants were randomly assigned to one of both conditions which represented either a high pace or a low pace manipulation.

4.2 Participants

Participants were recruited via my personal network to take part in the survey. All participants read and checked an informed consent before taking the survey. Participants were included in the sample on the basis of the following inclusion criteria: a) age above 18 years, b) answered all questions, & c) answered the test question correctly. The size of the sample had to be around 100 according to the estimation of G*power (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007). Out of 172 respondents who started the survey, 113 were selected based on the inclusion criteria. The sample consisted of 53 females with a mean age of 24 years and 60 males with a mean age of 36. Out of the 113 respondents, various nationalities participated. 93 participants were Dutch, 8 were of other countries in Europe, 2 persons were Asian, 2 were Oceanian and one person rather not specified his nationality.

4.3 Procedure

Participants were invited to take part in this study via a link to a survey on Qualtrics.com. By opening the link, participants were welcomed by an informed consent. The informed consent provided information about the purpose of the study and stated that results would be

interpreted anonymous and results remained confidential. By starting the test, participants accepted the informed consent. After that, participants all received a voice test question in

(17)

17 which participants were asked to put on headphones and listen to a fragment. To check

whether the sound was working properly all participants listened to a voice fragment which said ‘blue’. By indicating the right color, participants proceeded to the next question. When individuals indicated the wrong color, they were asked to listen to the fragment again and after that indicate the right color until they marked the right color. After that, the importance of bidding realistically was stressed and the manipulation started.

Participants were either assigned to the high pace or low pace condition group. The experiment was the same for both groups apart from the content of the fragment they were asked to listen to. First, they were asked to read a situation sketch and imagine being in that given situation. After that, they were asked to listen to the fragment. Participants in the low pace group listened to a fragment of the man speaking with low pace and participants in the high pace group listened to a fragment of the man speaking with high pace. To proceed participants were asked what the fragment was about. After listening to the fragment, participants were asked what their first offer was based on the information provided.

Subsequently, participants were told that the negotiation had come to an end for this moment and proceeded to the questionnaires about perceived competence and personality

characteristics. Lastly, participants were asked to fill in demographic information about their selves and after that were thanked for their participation. After this the survey and

participation in the experiment was ended.

4.4 Materials

This chapter describes the measures that are used to conduct the experiment. The

manipulation of pace, the independent variable, has been based on prior experimental studies and the questionnaires that are used are mostly based on existing scales to ensure construct validity.

(18)

18 Pace. In this experiment, the same male speaker spoke the following words in both conditions: ‘okay, let’s talk about business. What price are you thinking about?’. The speaking rate considered to be either high or low was based on previous research (Miller et al., 1976, & Smith et al., 1975). The low pace manipulation consisted of a fragment spoken in 113 words per minute. The high pace manipulation consisted of a fragment spoken in 220 words per minute. The speaker was instructed to speak either slowly or fast while keeping other voice characteristics like volume and intonation constant to be able to discriminate the pace.

Negotiation outcome. The negotiation outcome was determined by the amount indicated at the first offer of participants. This amount was a number which represented an numeric value in Euros. After hearing the manipulation fragment, participants were asked to insert their first offer. This question was similar for both conditions. To stress the importance of making a realistic offer, a window before making an offer stated that offers should be done realistically, keeping in mind the situation provided.

Perceived competence. Perceived competence is operationalized by an adjusted version of the Perceived Competence Scale (PCS). To make the items more applicable to this study, the questions were adjusted to information provided in the experiment. This scale consists of 4 items. A sample item is: ‘I believe that Paul Adams is self-assured’. Participants score the extent to which they identified with the statement on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). A higher score indicates higher

perceived competence. The reliability analysis in SPSS showed that the instrument had a good internal consistency of a= .88. The full questionnaire can be found in appendix 2.

Other characteristics. A questionnaire consisting of 10 items was added to the study to identify some exploratory personality characteristics. The aim of this questionnaire was to get some more insight into the first impression of personality characteristics of the counterpart

(19)

19 in a negotiation. For all 10 items, the same question was asked: ‘How much do you think the following characteristic describe Paul Adams?’. A sample item was ‘dominant’. Participants were asked to indicate to what extent they thought the characteristic would apply to Paul Adams based on their first impressions. Answers could be given by means of a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (does not describe Paul Adams) to 7 (describes Paul Adams extremely well). The full questionnaire can be found in appendix 2.

Voice test. To check whether participants really listened to the fragment and whether they were able to listen to a fragment on their device, a voice check was included in the survey. Participants were asked what color they heard while listening to the fragment. The right answer was ‘blue’. Participants could only continue with the survey when they marked the right color.

4.5 Analytical plan

First, the data was converted from Qualtrics to Excel. After cleaning up the file with only relevant data, all data was analyzed using SPSS. Demographic data was analyzed using the explore and frequencies function. Non-completed surveys were excluded from the sample. To be able to include nominal variables in the analysis, dummy variables of condition and sex were created. Then, standardization checks for an equal distribution of sex and gender among groups were conducted. The distribution of sex was checked by a Chi-square test and the distribution of age was tested by an Independent-Samples T test, both in SPSS. After that, the effect of pace on the first offer was analyzed by an Independent-Samples T test. To study whether there was a mediation of perceived competence on the effect, the mediation was tested in SPSS with the PROCESS (V3.2) macro (model 4) of Hayes (2018). The exploratory analysis was also conducted with an Independent-Samples T test in SPSS.

(20)

20

5. Results 5.1 Descriptive data

Out of 172 participants, 113 individuals were included in the sample because only those met all inclusion criteria of being above 18 years, answered the voice test correctly and completed all questions. The descriptives of the sample can be found in table 1.

Table 1.

Number of Participants per Condition, Sex Difference per Condition, Mean Age per Condition and Standard Deviations (in Paratheses).

Low pace High pace

Number of participants 63 50

Male/Female 37/26 23/27

Mean age 30.95 (14.23) 29.66 (13.17)

5.2 Standardization checks

Two standardization checks have been carried out to check for differences in sex and mean age between the two conditions. Firstly, a Chi-square test was carried out to see whether sex was distributed equally between groups. Sex was the dependent variable and condition was the independent variable. The Chi-square test shows that there was no significant

difference in sex distribution between the two conditions, χ2 (1) = 1.81, p = .178. Secondly,

the distribution of age was examined by an Independent-Samples T test. Age was the

dependent variable and condition the independent variable. First, the assumption for equality of variances was tested. Levene’s test for equality of variances was non-significant, F(1,111) = 1.04, p = .310, indicating that the test for homogeneity of variances between groups was not violated. The test for normality is not met (both Shapiro-Wilk > .68, both p’s < .001). Because

(21)

21 both groups are >30 participants, normality can be assumed because of the Central Limit Theorem (Field, 2013). Also, the Q-Q plot of age showed that the values did not deviate that much from the diagonal line in both conditions, therefore the assumption of normality is not violated. The difference in mean age between groups was not significant,

t (111) = .496, p = .621. Therefore, it can be assumed that there was no difference in age between groups. Randomization of sex and age was thus successful.

5.3 Hypothesis 1

This analysis examined whether there was a significant difference in the mean of the first offer between both groups. This effect was checked by a 2 (condition: low pace vs high pace) x 1 (time of measurement) Independent-Samples T test. Condition was the independent variable and offer was the dependent variable. The assumption for normality was not met in both conditions (both Shapiro Wilk > .53, both p’s < .001). Because of the Central Limit Theorem, normality can be assumed (Field, 2013). The assumption of homogeneity of variances is met (F(1, 111) < .27, p = .607). Thus, the t-test for Equality of Means can be interpreted.

The difference in mean offer between groups is not significant on the a = .05 but is significant on the a = .10 level, t (111) = -1.87, p = .064. Table 2 shows the means and standard deviations of the offers in both groups. So, on the basis of a significance level of a = .10, there is a significant difference between groups in the height of the first offer, -5596.33, BCa 95% CI [−11524.20, 331.53]. Thus, the high pace group reported a 5596 euro higher first bid on average than the low pitch group. Because of the significance level of a = .10, the difference in offer between groups should be interpreted with caution.

(22)

22 Table 2

Per Condition the Mean Offer Scores and Standard Deviations (in Paratheses).

Offer

Low pace 29316.67 (10589.05)

High pace 34913.00 (20572.79)

5.4 Hypothesis 2

To examine whether perceived competence mediated the effect between pace and the first offer, a mediation analysis has been carried out in SPSS using PROCESS (V 3.2) macro (model 4) by Hayes (2018). The method by Baron and Kenny (1986) was used to test the mediation. Three regression analysis have been carried out. Firstly, pace was the independent variable and offer was the dependent variable. The first regression shows that pace is not a significant predictor of perceived competence (b = -.25, se = .25, t = -1.01, p = .318). This coefficient reflects the direct effect of pace on perceived competence within the path model. The second regression considered both pace and perceived competence as independent

variables and offer as the dependent variable. The regression shows that pace (b = 5832.73, se = 3009.29, t = 1.94, p = .055) is a significant predictor for the first offer on a a = .10 level, but perceived competence (b = 927.63, se = 1119.57, t = .83, p = .409) is not a significant predictor for the first offer. These coefficients reflect the direct effects of both pace and perceived competence on first offer within the path model. Lastly, there was no significant indirect effect of pace on the first offer, through perceived competence, b = -236.40, se = 455.79, 95% CI [-1385.19, 549.44]. Because zero does fall between the lower and upper bound of the 95% confidence interval, it can be assumed that this indirect effect is non-significant (Baron & Kenny, 1986). This coefficient reflects the indirect effect of pace on the first offer, through perceived competence within the path model. Thus, no mediation of

(23)

23 perceived competence on the effect of pace on the first offer is assumed based on this sample. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is rejected. The coefficients can be found in a visual presentation of the mediation analysis in figure 2.

Figure 2. Mediation analysis : The indirect effect of pace on negotiation outcomes through perceived competence

5.5 Exploratory analysis

To examine whether some personality characteristics were associated with pace, an exploratory analysis was conducted. This was conducted with the aim to provide some insights to provide directions for future research. An Independent-Samples T test was conducted with pace as the independent variable and the separate measures of the questionnaire as dependent variables. None of the personality characteristics showed

significant results. More elaborate results can be found in table 3. Therefore, it is assumed that there are no differences in perceived personality characteristics between the two conditions.

(24)

24 Table 3.

Per Personality Characteristic the Mean, Standard Deviation (in Paratheses) & Significance Sorted by Pace Condition

Personality characteristic Pace Mean (SD) Sig.

Commanding Low High 4.35 (1.58) 4.88 (1.56) .077 Dominant Low High 4.63 (1.62) 4.94 (1.75) .340 Important Low High 4.51 (1.42) 4.28 (1.26) .376 Powerful Low High 4.48 (1.42) 4.53 (1.36) .810 Prestigious Low High 4.44 (1.43) 4.30 (1.39) .591 Humble Low High 3.38 (1.76) 3.00 (1.37) .212 Minor Low High 3.21 (1.45) 3.06 (1.17) .563 Submissive Low High 3.32 (1.47) 3.38 (1.48) .823 Weak Low High 2.63 (1.29) 2.94 (1.52) .250 Unimportant Low High 2.97 (1.50) 3.32 (1.22) .183

(25)

25

6. Discussion

This chapter provides a description and interpretation of the results previously outlined. The outcomes of the hypotheses are compared to prior empirical studies and existing literature. Then, implications for both theory and management, limitations of this study and suggestions for future research are given. Lastly, a final conclusion of this study is discussed.

6.1 General discussion

The aim of this study was to answer the question of whether pace of speech has an effect on negotiation outcomes and whether perceived competence mediates this effect. Prior to this study, it was expected that an individual speaking in high pace would receive a higher negotiation outcome than an individual who speaks in low pace. In addition, it was expected that perceived competence would mediate this effect. Prior research indicated that a high pace is associated with higher persuasiveness (Smith et al., 1995). Also, prior research supported this expectation with a credibility cue effect stating that unconsciously, persons assess people who talk fast as more intelligent and knowledgeable compared to persons who talk slowly because it is assumed that people who talk fast also think fast. Also, the expectation states theory (Berger et al., 1985) indicated that people who are perceived to be more competent also reach higher outcomes. In addition, Smith et al. (1975) and Street Jr et al. (1984) found in their research that people who talk fast are also assessed to be more competent.

The results of the experiment imply that indeed people who talk fast receive higher negotiation outcomes. However, no mediation of perceived competence on the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes was found. To answer the research question, based on this study, it is assumed that speaking in high pace leads to higher negotiation outcomes. Furthermore,

perceived competence did not seem to mediate this effect. Overall, it can be concluded that a person who speaks in a fast pace, on average, obtains higher negotiation outcomes. Even

(26)

26 though the results were not all as expected, some alternative explanations for the rejected hypothesis are derived in the following.

Hypothesis 1 aimed to identify whether the influence of pace on positive outcomes translated to business negotiation settings. In line with the expectations based on prior research (Miller et al., 1976; Smith et al., 1995), the results show that high pace led to a higher negotiation outcome compared to the low pace group. Therefore hypothesis 1 was confirmed. Though, the result should be interpreted with caution because it was only significant on the a = .10 level. Also, this was a specific negotiation setting and as this was the first study to investigate this effect, more research is needed to generalize this finding to other negotiation contexts.

The purpose of hypothesis 2 was to identify whether perceived competence served as an underlying mechanism for this effect. Based on research of Smith et al. (1975) and Street Jr et al. (1984) it was expected that high pace would lead to higher perceived competence compared to low pace. Also, based on research of Berger et al. (1985) it was expected that high perceived competence would lead to higher negotiation outcomes. Therefore, the assumption was made that perceived competence would act as a mediator on the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes. In contrary to hypothesis 2, the results show that the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes was not mediated by perceived competence. This insignificant result could be derived from the methodology used in this study. First of all, the data might have been biased due to the sample. The sample in fact could be seen as non-representative for the population of business negotiators because it was not a prerequisite to have experience in business negotiations. Also, it could be caused by the lack of interest participants had in successfully answering all of the questions proposed in the survey. This could have led to a response bias because individuals just answered carelessly in a certain tendency.

(27)

27

6.2 Theoretical implications

Even though the research question could only be answered and interpreted with caution because of the significance level, several theoretical implications have been made. This is the first study to investigate the effect of pace in a negotiation setting. Previous studies about the influence of pace on perceptions or positive outcomes only studied day-to-day settings which were applicable in a broader context. This study specified the context to a business

negotiation setting. In line with the expectations based on prior research, it was found that a high pace induced higher negotiation outcomes. Prior empirical research found inconsistent support for whether low or high pace would lead to more positive outcomes (Miller et al., 1976; Smith & Schaffer, 1995). Based on this study, it is expected that a credibility effect also holds in a business negotiation setting. This is an important extension of existing literature because that implicates that speaking fast unconsciously activates a thought about intelligence of the other while in a negotiation.

It is not known whether the linear positive relationship between pace and competence found in prior research (Smith et al., 1975; Street Jr et al., 1983) holds is applicable to

business negotiation settings. Also, it is not known whether the expectation states theory (Berger et al., 1985) translates to business negotiation settings. The fact that these theories are not supported is believed to be a consequence of the shortcomings of methodological issues. A possible explanation could be that due to the virtual experimental setting, people did not obtain enough information to base their estimation of competence of their counterpart on. Therefore, it is suggested to study this in future research.

This study can be considered to be the start of more future research into the influence of voice on negotiation outcomes. This study only considered pace as voice characteristic but it would be very interesting to both further study the effect of pace itself but also other voice characteristics.

(28)

28

6.3 Practical implications

To enlarge negotiation outcomes, this study suggests that negotiators should speak in a fast pace while communicating in a business negotiation. The underlying mechanism which explains this effect is not supported. This non-significant result was based on convenience sampling, which is a threat to the generalizability of the findings to other contexts. The underlying mechanism behind the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes still needs to be empirically tested. Nonetheless, the results can still be applied by negotiators. Therefore, it is recommended to speak more rapidly while negotiating. Speaking faster can be easily trained by practicing to speak sentences in a faster tempo. By repeating this procedure occasionally, an individual will get used to the speaking pace. Also, by preparing arguments and

information before the negotiation starts, speaking faster can be induced because information will be more accessible in the working memory and therefore faster spoken.

6.4 Limitations and suggestions for future research

The most important limitation of this study was that results were either non-significant or significant only at a = .10 level. It is expected that this is mostly due to methodological limitations of the experiment. First, the sample was not representative to a business negotiation setting. As participants were recruited via my own network, it was not a

prerequisite to have experience in business negotiations. Therefore, even though it was stated that people should place an offer realistically, this result might have been biased due to a high variability in prior knowledge about business negotiations. This can also be seen in the big variability recognized in the standard deviations. Also, in hindsight it would have been interesting to study whether cultural differences occur. Therefore, the findings would have been more generalizable when only one nationality was chosen in the sample.

(29)

29 Another limitation to the generalizability of this study is that only the voice of a man has been included in the sample. Miles and Clenney (2010) found in their research that differences in negotiation outcomes are present between male and female. Therefore, the results of this study are only applicable to the pace of men in negotiations. Lastly, something that should be considered is the generalizability of the operationalization of the pace

manipulation. This study included an audio fragment as operationalization of pace. An audio fragment might only have been representative for a virtual negotiation situation. Purdey and Nye (2000) found in their study that so-called media richness does influence negotiation processes and outcomes. Therefore, it could be the case that the results are not generalizable to face-to-face business negotiations.

Following from the limitations in this study, some suggestions for future research are outlined in the following. Firstly, the sample should consist only of individuals who have experience in negotiating. This is of importance to make more reliable and representative conclusions about business negotiation settings. Secondly, it is recommended to separate the findings per nationality. It is interesting to study whether differences occur because of demographic and cultural backgrounds. The sample in this study was not diversified enough to make reliable predictions about cultural differences and preferences. Thirdly, it would be very interesting if differences occur between men and women speaking. Therefore, it is suggested to also include a woman’s voice in the experiment. Also, it is recommended to study this effect in a real life setting or in a simulated experimental setting where participants have the opportunity to have face to face contact. Lastly, it is recommended to either lengthen the fragment in the manipulation or insert multiple fragments to make sure participants have enough input to base their first impression on.

(30)

30

6.5 Conclusion

Previous research on the effect of pace on perceptions did not study a business negotiation context. Also, it did not study the underlying mechanism of why the pace of speech could have an influence on negotiation outcomes. Thus, the present study examined the effect of pace on negotiation outcomes and whether an underlying mechanism of this effect was perceived competence. Results show that individuals who speak in high pace reach higher negotiation outcomes than individuals who speak more deliberately. In addition, perceived competence did not seem to explain why this effect occurred and the exploratory factors did not seem to give more insights. Therefore, it is recommended to further study this effect to ensure generalizability. Also, to enlarge negotiation outcomes it is recommended to speak in a fast pace while negotiating.

(31)

31

7. Bibliography

Agndal, H. (2007). Current trends in business negotiation research. Stockholm School of Economics Research Paper, 3, 1-55.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173.

Berger, J., Wagner, D. G., & Zelditch Jr, M. (1985). Introduction: Expectation states theory: Review and assessment. Status, rewards, and influence: How expectations organize behavior, 1-72.

Berger, J., & Fişek, M. H. (2006). Diffuse status characteristics and the spread of status value: A formal theory. American Journal of Sociology, 111(4), 1038-1079.

Blount, S., Thomas-Hunt, M. C., & Neale, M. A. (1996). The price is right—Or is it? A reference point model of two-party price negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68(1), 1-12.

Conlon, D. & Shelton Hunt, C. (2002). Dealing with feeling: the influence of outcome representations on negotiation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13(1), 38-58.

Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum.

Dudenhöffer, T (2020). Overview table parameters [PDF file].

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior research methods, 39(2), 175-191.

(32)

32 Haag, C., & Fresnel, E. (2015). Implementing Voice Strategies in Extreme Negotiations: A

Conversation With Christophe Caupenne, Successful Former Commando of the French RAID Unit. Organization Management Journal, 12(1), 4-12.

Galinsky, A. D., & Mussweiler, T. (2001). First offers as anchors: the role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus. Journal of personality and social psychology, 81(4), 657. Kersten, G. 2001. Modelling distributive and integrative negotiations. Review and revised

characterization. Group Decision and Negotiation, 10(6). 493-514.

Klofstad, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Nowicki, S. (2015). Perceptions of competence, strength, and age influence voters to select leaders with lower-pitched voices. PloS one, 10(8). LaBarbera, P., & MacLachlan, J. (1979). Time-compressed speech in radio

advertising. Journal of Marketing, 43(1), 30-36.

Miles, E. W., & Clenney, E. F. (2010). Gender differences in negotiation: A status

characteristics theory view. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 3(2), 130-144.

Miller, N., Maruyama, G., Beaber, R. J., & Valone, K. (1976). Speed of speech and persuasion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 34(4), 615.

Naidoo, L. J. (2006). A new theory of leaders? Effects on follower performance: Cognitive and emotional sensemaking. In Academy of Management Annual Conference. Atlanta: USA.

Pitulla, M., & Nicholson (2005). Negotiation: How to make deals and reach agreement in business. Norwich, UK: Format and Biztantra Publishing.

Purdy, J. & Nye, P. (2000). The impact of communication media on negotiation outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11(2):162-187.

(33)

33 Scherer, K. R., Johnstone, T., & Klasmeyer, G. (2003). Vocal expression of emotion. In R. J.

Davidson, H. Goldsmith, & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), Handbook of the affective sciences, 433–456. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Semnani-Azad, Z., & Adair, W. L. (2013). Watch your tone… relational paralinguistic messages in negotiation: The Case of East and West. International Studies of Management & Organization, 43(4), 64-89.

Smith, B. L., Brown, B. L., Strong, W. J., & Rencher, A. C. (1975). Effects of speech rate on personality perception. Language and speech, 18(2), 145-152.

Smith, S. M., & Shaffer, D. R. (1995). Speed of speech and persuasion: Evidence for multiple effects. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(10), 1051-1060.

Sorokowski, P., Puts, D., Johnson, J., Żółkiewicz, O., Oleszkiewicz, A., Sorokowska, A., ... & Pisanski, K. (2019). Voice of authority: professionals lower their vocal frequencies when giving expert advice. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 43(2), 257-269.

Street Jr, R. L., Brady, R. M., & Putman, W. B. (1983). The influence of speech rate stereotypes and rate similarity or listeners' evaluations of speakers. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 2(1), 37-56.

Van Poucke, D., & Buelens, M. (2002). Predicting the outcome of a two-party price negotiation: Contribution of reservation price, aspiration price and opening offer. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(1), 67-76.

Van Zant, A. B., & Berger, J. (2019). How the voice persuades. Journal of personality and social psychology.

(34)

34

Appendix 1: SPSS output Descriptives participants

(35)

35

(36)

36

(37)

37

(38)

38

(39)

39

(40)

40

Appendix 2: Survey

On the following page, the complete survey can be found. Important to know is that persons only received questions of the manipulation they were assigned to. This was either ‘LP con’ or ‘HP con’ which represented low and high pace.

(41)

10-06-2020 23:25 Qualtrics Survey Software

Pagina 1 van 10 https://uvacommscience.eu.qualtrics.com/Q/EditSection/Blocks…veyID=SV_dhTzkYnMW3moeAR&ContextLibraryID=UR_0NisKkzcGSZoOhf

Start

Start.

Welcome and thank you for participating in my study!

Participation will only take 2 minutes, thank you for your time!

My thesis is about behavior in business negotiations. In the following pages, I will ask you to imagine yourself being in a real negotiation.

All information will remain confidential, will only be used for my thesis results and will not be associated with your name.

If you have any questions or remarks about this study feel free to contact me on iris.beeren@student.uva.nl.

You will listen to an audio recording, therefore it is needed to use your

headphones or any other device that allows you to listen to a fragment.

It is time to start, please put your headphones on now!

(42)

.

Audio test

If you have not done so already, please put on your headphones now. The following is a test to check if your sound is working properly:

Please listen to the recording and remember what colour is mentioned.

Test question. What colour did you hear in the audio test?

.

Perfect, you are ready to start the negotiaton.

On the next page, you will be asked to imagine a negotiation situation. Orange

Blue Yellow Green

(43)

Answer what you would do in a real-life situation. There are no right or wrong answers.

Please take this role seriously and answer the following questions realistically.

LP con

Situation.

Please imagine the following situation:

You are the owner of a hotel. You want to buy new beds because you are renovating the hotel.

Your budget is 50.000 Euro and you want to buy 150 beds. You aim to buy the beds at the lowest possible price that your opponent will accept your offer.

Today you are meeting Paul Adams, a salesman of a beds store, to negotiate about the purchase of new beds. You want to reach an agreement lower than 50.000 Euro for 150 units.

On the following page, you will listen to Paul Adams speaking before you make an offer.

Fragment.

Imagine Paul Adams just arrived in your office and the negotiation is about to begin.

Now, listen to what Paul Adams has to say by listening to the fragment

attached below.

(44)

Pagina 4 van 10 https://uvacommscience.eu.qualtrics.com/Q/EditSection/Blocks…eyID=SV_dhTzkYnMW3moeAR&ContextLibraryID=UR_0NisKkzcGSZoOhf

In order to start the fragment you can click on the play button.

Q179. What is Paul Adams asking you about?

Q offer.

Again, please imagine being in the following situation:

You are the owner of a hotel. You want to buy new beds because you are renovating the hotel.

Your budget is 50.000 Euro and you want to buy 150 beds. You aim to buy the beds at the lowest possible price that your opponent will accept your offer.

Today you are meeting Paul Adams, a salesman of a beds store, to negotiate about the purchase of new beds. You want to reach an agreement lower than 50.000 Euro for 150 units.

Consider you are making the

first offer.

What will be your first offer in the negotiation with Paul Adams?

Note: Please enter the full amount as numbers only (i.e without currency abbreviation, comma or period.

Offer Price Weather

(45)

.

Thank you for your offer, we stop the negotiation here.

Now, I would like to ask you about your first impression about Paul Adams.

There are no right or wrong answers. Just answer the questions based on your first impression and perception of him based on all information and the fragment provided.

Q1.

Based on your first impression about Paul Adams please indicate your rating on the following:

Q2.

Please rate how much you think the following characteristics describe Paul

Adams.

Completely disagree Moderately disagree Slightly disagree Somewhat Slightly agree I believe that Paul Adams is

self-assured:

I believe that Paul Adams is

capable:

skilled:

competent: Does not describe Paul Adams Describes Paul Adams extremely well

(46)

HP con

Situation.

Please imagine the following situation:

You are the owner of a hotel. You want to buy new beds because you are renovating the hotel.

Your budget is 50.000 Euro and you want to buy 150 beds. You aim to buy the beds at the lowest possible price that your opponent will accept your offer.

Today you are meeting Paul Adams, a salesman of a beds store, to negotiate about the purchase of new beds. You want to reach an agreement lower than 50.000 Euro for 150 units.

On the following page, you will listen to Paul Adams speaking before you make an offer.

Commanding Weak Submissive Important Humble Prestigious Minor Dominant Unimportant Powerful

(47)

Fragment.

Imagine Paul Adams just arrived in your office and the negotiation is about to begin.

Now, listen to what Paul Adams has to say by listening to the fragment attached

below.

In order to start the fragment you can click on the play button.

Q181. What is Paul Adams asking you about?

Q offer.

Again, please imagine being in the following situation:

You are the owner of a hotel. You want to buy new beds because you are renovating the hotel.

Offer Price Weather

(48)

Your budget is 50.000 Euro and you want to buy 150 beds. You aim to buy the beds at the lowest possible price that your opponent will accept your offer.

Today you are meeting Paul Adams, a salesman of a beds store, to negotiate about the purchase of new beds. You want to reach an agreement lower than 50.000 Euro for 150 units.

Consider you are making the

first offer.

What will be your first offer in the negotiation with Paul Adams?

Note: Please enter the full amount as numbers only (i.e without currency abbreviation, comma or period.

.

Thank you for your offer, we stop the negotiation here.

Now, I would like to ask you about your first impression about Paul Adams.

Note: There are no right or wrong answers. Just answer the questions based on your first impression and perception of him based on all information and the fragment provided.

Q3.

Based on your first impression about Paul Adams please indicate your rating on the following: Completely disagree Moderately disagree Slightly disagree Somewhat Slightly agree I believe that Paul Adams is

capable:

I believe that Paul Adams is

self-assured:

(49)

Q4.

Please rate how much you think the following characteristics describe Paul

Adams.

Demographics

.

Thank you for your effort, to finish up I only have three more questions about you. After answering these the survey is complete!

competent: Does not describe Paul Adams Describes Paul Adams extremely well Submissive Commanding Minor Weak Dominant Humble Unimportant Powerful Important Prestigious

(50)

Pagina 10 van 10 https://uvacommscience.eu.qualtrics.com/Q/EditSection/Blocks…eyID=SV_dhTzkYnMW3moeAR&ContextLibraryID=UR_0NisKkzcGSZoOhf Powered by Qualtrics

.

Gender

.

Age

Q173. Nationality

Male Female Other