Does express sadness help in negotiation? Comparing Western and
Eastern cultural background.
Name: Ruixi Zheng Student Number.: 11734248 Supervisor: Dr. Alfred Zerres
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to examine to what extent does express sadness affect negotiation outcomes through the mediation effect of other-concern. And whether the effect lasts across different cultural settings. Also, the effect of Western and Eastern cultural background is compared.
Design/Method/Approach: An online survey-based experiment is designed to answer the research question. The design is a between-subject 2 (sadness condition/neutral condition) x 2 (Eastern/Western cultural background) design. This study uses nonprobability sampling due to the time constraint. The data is generated through two sample populations. One is through convenience sampling. Another part of the sample is collected through Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Each participant is asked to imagine themselves as a manager to face a salary raise request statement from an employee. Participants are randomly presented with one of two employees’ statements (neutral or sadness).
Findings: The results show that sadness expression has a positive effect on the intended salary raise. And there is a positive relationship between sadness expression and other-concern, as well as a positive relationship between other-concern and intended salary raise. Also, culture backgrounds moderate the positive relationship between sadness expression and intended salary raise. This relationship is stronger if the emotion recipient has an eastern cultural background.
Implications: This study contribute to researches on emotions’ impact of negotiation in the interpersonal level. And the effect of sadness expression and cultural background could be helpful for negotiators in international environment.
1. INTRODUCTION ... 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ... 6
2.1EMOTION IN NEGOTIATION ... 6
2.1.1 The expression of sadness ... 6
2.1.2 The expression of anger ... 6
2.2CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN EMOTION RESPONSE ... 9
2.3RESEARCH GAP AND RESEARCH QUESTION... 12
2.4THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: ... 13
Figure 1: a conceptual framework ... 15
3. DATA AND METHOD ... 16
3.1DATA ... 16 3.2PROCEDURE ... 16 3.3OPERATIONALIZATION ... 17 3.3.1 Independent variable ... 17 3.3.2 Dependent variables ... 19 3.3.3 Other variables ... 19 4. RESULTS ... 20 4.1PARTICIPANTS... 20
Table 1: Descriptive statistics (total sample data) ... 21
Table 2: Descriptive statistics (specified by experimental condition) ... 22
4.2ANALYTICAL STRATEGY ... 23
4.2.1 Missing Values ... 23
4.2.2. Recode ... 23
4.2.3 Reliability ... 23
4.2.4 Correlation matrix ... 24
Table 3. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations ... 24
4.3HYPOTHESES TESTING ... 24
Figure 2: Module 8 ---statistical module (adopted from Hayes, 2012) ... 25
Table 4: ... 26
4.3.1 Hypothesis 1 ... 26
4.3.2 Hypothesis 2 ... 26
4.3.3 Hypothesis 3 ... 27
Table 5: ... 28
Figure 3: a conceptual module with coefficients ... 20
5.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ... 29
7. REFERENCE:... 32
1. Introduction
Most people will feel embarrassed or humiliated if they cried at work, while research shows sometimes expressing sadness could be an advantage in negotiations (Benna, 2015). A research paper published in the Journal of Applied Psychology mentions that showing
sadness can help negotiator to claim more value according to the social context (Sinaceur, Kopelman, Vasiljevic & Haag, 2015). When could sadness expression become useful in negotiations? The same authors use an anecdote at the Cuban missile crisis to illustrate: When Soviet ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin visited the U.S., the president's aid, Robert Kennedy, showing sadness through his verbal and facial expression. Such as he seems “almost crying.” , or sadly saying “I haven’t seen my children for days now,”, “….I don’t know how much longer we can hold out against our generals,” (Allison, 1971; Divine, 1988; Khrushchev, 1970, p. 51; in Sinaceur et al., 2015, p. 1). After that, Soviet Premier Khrushchev thought “We could see that we had to reorient our position swiftly” and he “agreed to remove missiles and bombers” (Khrushchev, 1970, p. 51; in Sinaceur et al., 2015). Although sadness is not the only reason that makes Khrushchev made the decision, it is reasonable to believe sadness could help to elicit concessions (Sinaceur et al., 2015). Why does showing sadness works here? Is it due to Khrushchev shares a similar culture value with Robert Kennedy? Alternatively, is it due to Robert’s concern for others? Small kids already learned to strategically cry towards parents to get the toy they want (Buss & Kiel, 2004). When people want to gain more benefits in negotiation by expressing sadness, it is essential to know what factors will influence the counterparts’ decision making. So the general research question is:
“To what extent does express (the emotion) sadness affect negotiation outcomes. In different (Eastern vs. Western) cultural settings?”
As negotiation is an approach that people use to reach an agreement (Barry et al., 2004). It is not only a business action between two parties, but plenty of emotion are also involved in the negotiation process (Lary et al., 2013). Although revealing emotion might be an unprofessional behavior (Fromm, 2017), it could also be beneficial in some circumstances.
As sadness is one of six human basic emotion (Ekman, 1993), it could also plays an importance part in the negotiation. Sinaceur et al. (2015) find that the effectiveness of sadness is related to social contexts. Counterparties’ power differences, the expectation of future interaction and the relationship between two parties will all influences the negotiator’s reaction. Moreover, Shirako, Kilduff, and Kray (2015) find that a negotiator could gain more economics benefits by showing weakness, due to the appeal behavior could elicit the counterpart’s sympathy. Study finds mechanism behind the casual relationship between sadness expression and negotiation outcome is through Other-Concern (Eisenberg, 2000). Other-Concern is the concerns of others such as considering others’ need for help, including empathy and compassion (Sinaceur et al., 2015). In this study, we believe the more other-concern emotion recipients have, the more concessions they make. This effect is also examined in this study.
As “culture refers to socially shared and transmitted patterns of ideas (values, norms, and beliefs) that are instantiated in everyday practice” (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952; in Ford & Mauss, 2015). So culture background plays an important role in how people express their emotion (Heels, 1986), and shapes emotional reaction (Tsai, 2006). Also, culture carried by western and eastern countries varies a lot (Cross, 2011). Such as “In Western or individualist culture, high arousal emotions are valued and promoted more than low arousal emotions.” Lim (2016, p.105), where high arousal emotions include anger, happiness (Russell, 1980). On the contrary, “ in Eastern or collectivist culture, low arousal emotions are valued more than high arousal emotions.” Lim (2016, p.1), where low arousal emotions include sadness (Russell, 1980), helpless (Suh & Koo, 2011). Moreover, East Asians do not express their emotions as often as European Americans (Adam & Shirako, 2013). So it is reasonable to
assume the signaling value of sadness is different between the Western and Eastern culture. In previous literature, anger is the most researched emotions in negotiation (Thompson,
Wang, & Gunia, 2010), while sadness is less mentioned. Also, the influence of culture is less mentioned. To find out how sadness expression influences the negotiation outcome, and whether culture background impacts negotiators' reaction to sadness expression. This research uses an online experiment to examine whether a negotiator deliberately shows sadness influences the counterparty, as well as the negotiation outcome. Regarding the possible reaction differences across cultures, this study collects respondents’ nationality to measure cultural background.
The remainder of this thesis contains 4 sections. Section 2 concludes the previous related literature. Section 3 introduces the data and analytical methodology. Section 4 explains empirical results. Finally, the fifth section discuss about the general results and give managerial and theoretical implications.
2. Literature Review
2.1 Emotion in negotiation
According to Thompson et al.(2010), the negotiators' behavior and negotiation outcomes could depend on the negotiators' cognitions and experiences (intrapersonal level), such as the negotiators' gender or sense of power. Also, the outcome or negotiators behavior will be influenced by the counterparts’ behaviors or mood (interpersonal level). Studies on emotions in negotiation built connections between the intrapersonal and interpersonal level. Because not only the individual’s emotion will impact the information processing procedure, but also the other parties’ cognitions and behaviors (Morris & Keltner, 2000). According to Ekman (1993) and Scherer (1986), people can read, notice and understand the facial, vocal and bodily expression of others. And emotions arises in response to problems in the negotiations (Morris & Keltner, 2000). Recent literature about emotion mainly focuses on anger and happiness (Thompson, Wang, & Gunia, 2010). As negotiation commonly happens
when it comes to conflict or disagreement, so the expression of anger is common and noticeable (Allred, 1999). Most people will consider that individuals expressing anger as tough and dominant (Tiedens, 2001;Tiedens et al., 2000), also such perception could influence the outcome of negotiations. Negotiators concede more when they think counterparts are in the dominant position, comparing to those perceived as weak or less powerful (Komorita & Brenner, 1968). So it is reasonable to conclude if expressing anger results in the image of toughness, anger expression would lead to a compromise in many cases (Sinaceur & Tiedens, 2006). The study of Van Kleef et al. (2004) discover the effects of anger and happiness in the negotiation. In one study, attendants received their opponent's emotional state information (anger, joy or none). The results show that people concede more when they face an angry counterpart than a happy opponent, which is inconsistent with the research mentioned before. People use opponents' emotional state to deduce the possible negotiation boundaries. Morover, adjust demand according to the border. Yet, when the counterpart made a large settlement, this effect was not found. Van Kleef et al. (2004) also found that when negotiators face with an angry opponent, they are very likely to have a negative impression of the counterpart. Also, they might turn into angry and not willing to corporate (Friedman et al., 2004), and do not want a future relationship with the other party (Kopelman et al., 2006; Van Kleef et al., 2004b). Nevertheless, inconsistent findings are found in the same studies, which suggests the existing of moderators. The effects of anger are mediated by the individual's motivation to treat the information seriously and consistently (Van Kleef et al., 2004; De Dreu & Carnevale 2003). Also, high time pressure will reduce the effect of emotion as participants do not have enough time to process information. Last but not least, only low powered negotiators will be affected by counterparts' emotions (Keltner et al., 2003). The authors argue that since high-power negotiators have more options as alternatives, they are less motivated. On the contrary, negotiators with lower power are motivated to make
agreements due to lack of alternatives. In the further study of Van Kleef et al. (2007), they tried to discover when the expression of anger will help and when will hurt to win the conflict. They found the higher power negotiators will demand more value when the other party is inappropriate to express anger. Besides, The fitness of the expressions would affect negotiators' reaction, because it may relate to the sense of fairness (Leventhal, 1980) and the sense of justice between two parties (Bies & Moag, 1986).
As sadness is one of six human basic emotions (Ekman, 1993), sadness could also plays an importance part in the negotiation. Sadness arises when individual experiences disadvantage, helpless, disappointment, loss, despair, grief, and sorrow (Jellesma & Vingerhoets, 2012), and plays as a supplication function (Clark, Pataki, & Carver, 1996). Sadness arises in different situations, and it transmits the information to others that the one needs help (Tomkins, 1963). In situations that interpersonal relationships are involved (Vince, 2006). Such as airplane passengers complain about the delay (Scherer & Ceschi, 2000), or people who applies for housing allowances (Garot, 2004). Sadness could be expressed in many ways, such as crying or saying “Please support me” (Yik & Russell, 1999). When negotiator expresses their sadness, it could be considered as revealing their weakness and vulnerability, which could elicit counterpart’s other-concern. Sadness could play as a supplication function (Clark, Pataki, & Carver, 1996). Expressions of sadness have been proven to increase the perceptions of privation and dependency (Clark & Taraban, 1991) and to earn helping behavior in both children and adults (Clark et al., 1987; Yee & Greenberg, 1998). Crying was proven to be an efficient way of producing a positive and desired change in others' behavior, such as a behavior shift from opposite to support (Cornelius, 1984). Because showing sadness delivers the need for support and subordination (Moore & Watson, 2001), and causes others empathy and helping behavior (Eisenberg, 2000). Similarly, crying at work for a job raise could consider as a help-seeking function (Eason et al., 1991).
2.2 Other-concern
Studies find sadness expression could elicit recipients’ feel of empathy, compassion, and the need for their help (Eisenberg, 2000; Horstmann, 2003). In total , the feeling of empathy and compassion as well as considering others’ need for help is called other-concern (Eisenberg et al., 1989 ). Other-concern contains moral emotions People’s behavior will be influenced if they have reasons to feel concern for the other party (Sinaceur et al., 2015). Sympathy, empathy and compassion are in the moral emotions’ “other-suffering ” group (Haidt, 2003). These emotions generally elicited by people who are suffering , experiencing vulnerability, or in the state of need (Goetz, Keltner, & Simon-Thomas, 2010). Empathy is feeling what another person feels, sympathy is to understand how the other person feels, and compassion is to do your best to eliminate the other person’s suffering (Burton, 2015). Burton (2015) also indicates that “sympathy and empathy often lead to each other”.
2.3 Cultural differences
Culture is playing an important role in the negotiation. As “culture refers to socially shared and transmitted patterns of ideas (values, norms, and beliefs) that are instantiated in everyday practice” (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952; in Ford & Mauss, 2015). So culture background plays an important role in how people express their emotion (Heels, 1986), and shapes emotional reaction (Tsai, 2006). Also, culture carried by western and eastern countries varies a lot (Cross, 2011). Such as “In Western or individualist culture, high arousal emotions are valued and promoted more than low arousal emotions.” Lim (2016, p.105), where high arousal emotions include anger, happiness (Russell, 1980). On the contrary, “ in Eastern or collectivist culture, low arousal emotions are valued more than high arousal emotions.” Lim (2016, p.1), where low arousal emotions include sadness (Russell, 1980), helpless (Suh &
Koo, 2011). Moreover, East Asians do not express their emotions as often as European Americans (Adam & Shirako, 2013). “In Western culture, people try to influence others.” (Lim, 2016, p.106). So for people with western culture background, emotions such as anger or happiness are more suitable and effective (Tsai et al., 2007). While “in Eastern culture, adjusting and conforming to other people is considered desirable.” (Lim, 2016, p.106). So emotions such as sadness are more likely to work better than anger (Tsai et al., 2007).
Varnum et al. (2010) analyze a large number of researches about cognitive differences between Westerners and East Asians. They find Westerner are more rational and East Asians care more about integrated results. The difference is often explained by different preference in social environment. Due to Westerners tend to be more independent and Easterners tend to be more interdependent in social relations.
The Hofstede model is widely used for cross culture analysis. It measures six dimension of national cultures, including Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism/Collectivism, Masculinity/Femininity, Long/Short Term Orientation, and Indulgence/Restraint (Hofstede, 2011; Hofstede et al., 2010 ). Power distance means to what extend the less powerful individual in the organization accept as well as expect the unequally distribution of power. From the website of Hofstede Insight, we could compare culture value of countries. According to the sample data we collect, the most of the data is Chinese sample (N=379), the second is Americans (N=64), and Indian ranks the third (N=51). So we choose these three countries to compare their culture value. From the table we could find, the power distance of China (PDI=80) is twice as large as that of United States(PDI=40). And India has similar score as China (PDI=77). High score indicates that people are generally accept the inequalities of different social classes in both China and India. People accept their social class. People are strongly influenced by authorities, they are not tend to against superiors. As for Americans, the power distance index indicates the fact that people believes that individuals
are not equal in societies, and that means people believe that everybody is unique and that implies individuals are unequal. Also, power is defined as the ability that to what extend a person could influence other people’s opinion and action. Individualism is defined as the degree of interdependence a society maintains among its members (Hofstede, 2011). The fundamental difference between individualism and collectivism is the self-image of “I” or “we”. In the individualism society, individuals are tend to only take care of themselves and direct family members. While in the collectivism society, individuals are tend to looking after other members in the same social group such as collogues in the same company. They are doing it in exchange for others’ loyalty. China has a score of 20, which means the culture is highly collectivism. People behave based on the group interests instead of their own interests. It means individuals are more likely to hire or give promotions to people who are in the same group. For example, people are inclined to hire or give promotion to their relatives or people recommended by acquaintances. India has an intermediate score (IDV=48), which means the society has both individualism and collectivism. The collectivism side can be explained by a individual’s preference to be in a large social group. Then they are expected to behave in line with the benefits of the whole group. In such social context, individuals’ behaviors are influenced by others’ opinion, such as family members, friends, and surroundings. The relationship between employer and employee is built on expectations. According to Hofstede (2010), the loyalty of employee is based on the belief that their employer will protect them if they do something wrong. Similarly, their loyalty could earn future promotion by their employer. The individualism side is considered as the results of Hinduism philosophy. They believe that how they behave in this life will influence next life. So they are responsible for their behavior to have a good next life. America has the most score on individualism, as the society focuses and promotes equal right. Commonly, there is flat hierarchy in organizations. People are not afraid of questioning superiors. Managers or superiors works with other
employees that in a same team and they are open to opinions. Employee frequently exchanges and consults information with manager. Also, business organization expect employees to be independent and rely on themselves to solve problems. The decision of hiring and promotion is based on individual’s own performance.
Table 1: Hofstede model---Country Comparison: China vs. India vs. USA
2.4 Research gap and Research question
In conclusion, recent research suggested that in the negotiation or conflict, negotiators can use expressing emotions to get the other party’s concessions. Anger is the most researched emotions in negotiation (Thompson, Wang, & Gunia, 2010). However, little literature mentioned the emotion sadness. Among the previous research on the effectiveness of sadness expression. Sinaceur et al. (2015) find the appropriate social contexts that sadness expression is efficient. The authors find showing sadness helps when: the emotion expresser is at the lower-power position; the future interaction exists; the emotion recipient considers the relationship is collaborative. Kunzmann and Grühn (2005) find age differences
in sadness reactions. The impacts of different cultural background on sadness emotion in negotiations remains a research gap. Having the research gap leads to the research question:
To what extent does express (the emotion) sadness affect negotiation outcomes. In different (Eastern vs. Western) cultural settings?
To be more specific, there are 2 research questions:
1. Does the indirect effect of the sadness expression (X) on the Intended salary raise (Y) through Other-concern (M) depend on the Cultural background (W)?
2. Does any effect of sadness expression (X) that remains after accounting for an Intended salary raise (Y) depend on the Cultural background (W)?
2.5 Theoretical framework:
As sadness is one of six human basic emotions (Ekman, 1993), sadness could also plays an importance part in the negotiation. Sadness arises when individual experiences disadvantage, helpless, disappointment, loss, despair, grief, and sorrow (Jellesma & Vingerhoets, 2012), and plays as a supplication function (Clark, Pataki, & Carver, 1996). When negotiator expresses their sadness, it could be considered as revealing their weakness and vulnerability, which could elicit counterpart’s other-concern. Sadness could play as a supplication function (Clark, Pataki, & Carver, 1996). Expressions of sadness have been proven to increase the perceptions of privation and dependency (Clark & Taraban, 1991) and to earn helping behavior in both children and adults (Clark et al., 1987; Yee & Greenberg, 1998). Crying was proven to be an efficient way of producing a positive and desired change in others' behavior, such as a behavior shift from opposite to support (Cornelius, 1984). Because showing sadness delivers the need for support and subordination (Moore & Watson,
2001), and causes others empathy and helping behavior (Eisenberg, 2000). So this research propose:
H1: Sadness expression has a positive effect on the intended salary raise.
Studies find sadness expression could elicit recipients’ feel of empathy, compassion, and the need for their help (Eisenberg, 2000; Horstmann, 2003). In total , the feeling of empathy and compassion as well as considering others’ need for help is called other-concern (Eisenberg et al., 1989 ). People’s behavior will be influenced if they have reasons to feel concern for the other party (Sinaceur et al., 2015). So we want to find out whether sadness condition would be effective if people have reason to act on caring for others. This research propose people will concede based on their other-concern when the sadness condition provides them with enough reason to experience the caring for others.
H2: Other-concern mediates the positive effect of sadness expression on the intended salary raise.
H2a: There is a positive relationship between sadness expression and other-concern. H2b: There is a positive relationship between other-concern and intended salary raise.
“Culture refers to socially shared and transmitted patterns of ideas (values, norms, and beliefs) that are instantiated in everyday practice” (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952; in Ford & Mauss, 2015). So we believe culture is playing an important role in the negotiation. Westerners are mainly influenced by individualism and Easterners are mainly influenced by collectivelism. In the individualism society, individuals are tend to only take care of themselves and direct family members. While in the collectivism society, individuals are tend to looking after other members in the same social group such as collogues in the same company. They are doing it in exchange for others’ loyalty. People behave based on the
group interests instead of their own interests. It means individuals are more likely to hire or give promotions to people who are in the same group. The relationship between employer and employee is built on expectations. According to Hofstede (2010), the loyalty of employee is based on the belief that their employer will protect them if they do something wrong. Similarly, their loyalty could earn future promotion by their employer. In the individualism society, business organization expect employees to be independent and rely on themselves to solve problems. Employees are not afraid of questioning superiors. Managers or superiors works with other employees that in a same team and they are open to opinions. Employee frequently exchanges and consults information with manager. The decision of hiring and promotion is based on individual’s own performance.
So this study propose that Easterners will give more intended salary, comparing with Westerners:
H3: Culture backgrounds moderate the positive relationship between sadness expression and intended salary raise, such that this relationship is stronger if the emotion recipient has a
eastern cultural background.
Figure 1: a conceptual framework
H1 (+) H2a (+) H2b (+) H2 H3 Sadness vs. Rational Condition Sadness Expression Intended salary raise Culture
Eastern Culture Value vs.
Western Culture Value
3. Data and Method
A quantitative study based on the online experiment conducted to test the hypothesis and answer the research question. The following part is a further explanation of the experiment methodology. The first part introduces the research design. Then, the second part of this chapter briefly explains the experimental procedure. The last part discusses the particular variables’ operation method including manipulation and measurement.
3.1 Data
An online survey-based experiment is designed to answer the research question. The design is a between-subject 2 (sadness condition/neutral condition) x 2 (Eastern/Western cultural background) design. According to Lewis and Saunders (2012), the online experiment is designed to be a sufficient method to examine the hypotheses of variables. Due to the time constraint, this study uses nonprobability sampling. The data is generated through two sample populations. One is through convenience sampling with an online sample (Neuman, 2012), which collects data mainly from Chinese participants. Another part of the sample is collected from Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). It is an Amazon’s paid data collection platform, which offers researchers a more efficient way to collect better quality data (find more detail at Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011).
3.2 Procedure
Participants are invited to take an online experiment through the Qualtircs. In the survey based experiment, respondents are presented with structured questions and predefined answers. At first, they are told the experiment is about a salary raise negotiation (adapted from Shirako, Kilduff, & Kray, 2015). Each participant is asked to imagine themselves as a
manager. Participants are randomly presented with one of two employees’ statements (neutral or sadness).
After reading the statement, participants indicate the intended salary raise that they are willing to offer (0%-50%). It is expected participants would give higher raise if they are presented with sadness condition. The manipulation test is conducted after the measurement of a dependent variable, to avoid the participants guess the research question. Self-Report measurements with a list of seven-point Likert scale to access participants attitudes (Sinaceur et al., 2015). As self-Reports could be a sufficient measurement to measure participants’ psychological reaction (Robinson and Clore, 2002).
Also, the Value Survey Module (VSM2013) developed by Hofstede and Minkov (2010) is used to examine whether the culture value differs across cultures. It measures culture value in six dimensions, including power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and indulgence (Hofstede & Minkov, 2010). In the end, a list of demographic questions according to age, gender and education are presented.
3.3 Operationalization 3.3.1 Independent variable
Sadness expression (other-concern appeals): Participants face with one of two emotional conditions (neutral or sadness). In the sadness condition, the note will include the information that the employee is qualified for a raise while his/her family is struggling with hospital bills While in the natural emotion condition, the employee’s note will only mention that he/she is qualified for a salary raise. The sentences refer to the employee’s past working performance presents in both conditions.
People’s behavior will be influenced if they have reasons to feel concern for the other party (Sinaceur et al., 2015). So we have to find out which sadness condition would be effective for people to act on concern for others. Sadness arises when individual experiences disadvantage, helpless, disappointment, loss, despair, grief, and sorrow (Jellesma & Vingerhoets, 2012). When negotiator expresses their sadness, it could be considered as revealing their weakness and vulnerability, which could elicit counterpart’s other-concern. Sadness could play as a supplication function (Clark, Pataki, & Carver, 1996). It delivers the need for support and subordination (Moore & Watson, 2001), and causes others empathy and helping behavior (Eisenberg, 2000). Sadness transmits the information to others that the one needs help (Tomkins, 1963). Expressions of sadness have been proven to increase the perceptions of privation and dependency (Clark & Taraban, 1991) and to earn helping behavior in both children and adults (Clark et al., 1987; Yee & Greenberg, 1998).
Sadness could be expressed in many ways. In this experiment, the sadness expression means sharing information of personal difficulties and needs. Because previous studies show that detailed information will help to motivate prosocial behavior (Batson et al., 2003). The study of Eisenberg et al. (1989) finds that participants would like to give more help if they viewed an video of a car accident victim with her injured kids, comparing to participants who did not viewed the video. In prisoner’s dilemma experiments, participants will be more willing to corporate if they are asked to imagine the counter party is experiencing a heartbreak break up (Batson & Ahmad, 2001). So in the experiment, the statement of sadness condition shows the negotiation counterpart is in the position of financial disadvantage and seeking for help to operationalize sadness. As the employee’s family problem indicate the employee is experiencing difficulties and need help, which are the signals for sadness (Frijda, 2007). And this emotion setting is instructed to elicit counterpart’s concern for others.
Sadness condition: ‘‘I have overseen the success of many of our most profitable deals over the past few months. I am also faced with extenuating circumstances—my mother is in the hospital with a terminal illness, and I am struggling to pay the bills.”
Rational condition: ‘‘I have overseen the success of many of our most profitable deals over the past few months.”; (adopted from Shirako et al., 2015).
In the end, Moreover, manipulation questions such as “How positive or negative was your attitude toward the employee after reading the note?” is presented. Also, participants are asked to rate the professional of the employees to check if the expression influence perceived profession.
3.3.2 Dependent variables Intended salary raise:
After reading the statement of the employee, participants indicated how large of a salary raise they are willing to give in the range of 0%-50% (Adapted from Shirako et al., 2015). Here the intended salary raise is the negotiation outcome. The higher the intended raise, the stronger the positive effect of sadness expression.
3.3.3 Other variables
Culture background(Moderator):
The participant’s cultural background is measured to analyze the influence of cultural background. Also, the Value Survey Module (VSM2013) is used to comparing culturally influenced values (Hofstede & Minkov, 2010). It measures culture value in six dimensions, including power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and indulgence (Hofstede & Minkov, 2010).
Other-Concern(Mediator):
Other-Concern means the concerns of others such as considering others’ need for help, including empathy and compassion (Sinaceur et al., 2015). So this research propose people will concede based on their other-concern when the sadness condition provides them with enough reason to experience the caring for others. According to Sinaceur et al., (2015), they combine the measures of empathy, compassion, and recognition for help (Eisenberg, 2000; Graham et al., 2008; Scherer & Grandjean,2008) into one 7-point Likert scales questionnaire to operationalize. Questions such as “How much empathy did you feel for your opponent?”, “How much did you think that your employee was deserving compassion?”; and “How much did you think that your employee needed your help?” will be asked (adapted from Sinaceur et al., 2015).
Control variables:
Participants’ age, gender, education, and job are recorded as control variables.
4. Results
In this chapter, the empirical results is presented. Following previous studies (Sinaceur et al., 2014; Sinaceur & Tiedens, 2006; Van Kleef & De Dreu, 2010), a between-subject 2 (sadness condition/neutral condition) x 2 (Eastern/Western cultural background) design is used to test the hypothesized relationships. First part reported the characteristic of the sample data. The second part explains the analytical data strategy. The conditional effect of moderated mediation is examined in the last part of this chapter.
Table 1 is a summary of statistic, which illustrates the sample distribution. In total 889 responses are recorded, and 534 of them finished the survey (60.07% completion rate). The data is collected through two channels. The convenience sample accounts for 68.2% of the whole data (N=364), while 31.8% of the total sample is generated from the mTurk (N=170).
82% of participants come from eastern culture, and 18% of respondents have a western cultural background. Also, 83% of respondents have received college or higher education. To find the nationality distribution, please check table 1 for more information. Respondents are randomly presented with one request statement. Table 2 is a sample distribution specified by experiment condition. 49.4% of participants face with a sadness condition statement and 50.6% face rational condition (Nsadness=264;Nrational=270). The
average age of participants in the sadness condition group is 39 years old, including 58% male (Nfemale=111; Nmale=153). For the rational condition sample, the average age is 38 years
old, and 67% of them are male(Nfemale=90; Nmale=180). Participants with eastern background
on average give higher salary raise compared with people with western background (Msadness;western=19.09, SDsadness;western=13.40; Msadness;eastern=25.82, SDsadness;eastern=13.89;
Mrational;western=17.32, SDrational;western=14.10; Mrational;eastern=18.74，SDrational;esatern=12.23).
An independent sample t-test is conducted to examine whether respondents react and behave differently according to different emotional settings. On average, respondents faced with sadness condition chose higher salary raise than those in the rational condition (Msadness=24.65, SDsadness=14.02; Mrational=18.48, SDrational=12.58, t(534)=5.36,p=0.000).
Table 2: Descriptive statistics (total sample data)
Variable N Percentage
Convenience sample data 364 68.2%
Amazon Mturk data 170 31.8%
Sadness condition 264 49.4%
Rational condition 270 50.6%
Western Culture background 96 18% Eastern Culture background 438 82%
American 64 12% Indian 51 9.6% French 8 1.5% Italian 6 1.1% Dutch 6 1.1% Britain 4 0.7% Japanese 2 0.4% Korean 2 0.4%
College and higher education 444 83%
Table 3: Descriptive statistics (specified by experimental condition)
Sadness Condition; N=264 Rational Condition;N=270
Female N=111; 42% N=90; 33% Male N=153; 58% N=180; 67% Salary Msadness=24.65, SDsadness=14.02 Mrational=18.48, SDrational=12.58
Western Culture background Msadness;western=19.09,
SDsadness;western=13.40
Mrational;western=17.32,
SDrational;western=14.10
Eastern Culture background Msadness;eastern=25.82,
SDsadness;eastern=13.89
Mrational;eastern=18.74，
SDrational;esatern=12.23
4.2 Analytical Strategy 4.2.1 Missing Values
The frequency check was used to detect if there are any errors in the sample data. The missing values were dealt with choosing the option of excluding cases listwise. So, only cases with no missing data in any variable were selected when analyzing the data. In this case, 355 responses are listwise omitted due to unfinished survey questions.
4.2.2. Recode
The measurement scales were recoded, from 1(a great deal), and 7(not at all) to 7 (a great deal), 1(not at all). Also, the control variable gender was recoded to a new variable called female, the scale from 1 equals to male, and 2 equals female to 1 means female, and 0 is male.
4.2.3 Reliability
The reliability check was used to examine to what extent the measurement is consistent, reliable and valid. The other-concern measurement in both emotional settings and the VSM2013 module were examined. As the measurement constructs are adopted from previous researches, the Cronbach’s alpha used to be measured to check the reliability. However, in case of contingency, the reliability test is still conducted. The Cronbach’s Alpha (α>0.7) indicates a good level of internal consistency for all three measuring scales (with Other-concern α=0.90; VSM2013 α=0.83; manipulation check α=0.78). Also, for each measurement, the correlated item-total correlations are all above 0.30. The results indicate each question in the same set of measurement is consistent with other questions. Moreover, Cronbach’s Alpha will not be substantially affected if one of the questions is deleted. So all the questions in each measurement have high reliability and could be used for analysis (Saunders et al., 2009).
4.2.4 Correlation matrix
Scale means driven by choosing the option of means and standard deviations when making the correlation matrix. The correlation matrix is in table 3. From the table, we could find that intended salary raise has a positive linear relationship with sadness expression(with r=0.23, p<0.01). Cultural background and other-concern also have positive linear relationship with the intended salary raise (with r=0.18, p<0.01;n=0.14, p<0.05).
Table 3. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) (Bondrea, Geangu, Gârdan, & Cretoiu, 2014).
4.3 Hypotheses testing
Considering the research questions (Does the indirect effect of the sadness expression (X) on the Intended salary raise (Y) through Other-concern (M) depend on the Cultural background (W)? ; Does any effect of sadness expression (X) that remains after accounting for an Intended salary raise (Y) depend on the Cultural background (W)? ), the hypotheses propose that the effect of sadness expression on intended salary raise is through the intervening variable---people’s other-concern. Also, the research suggests people’s cultural background is a conditional variable that influences the outcome.
Variables Mea
n
SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Intended Salary Raise 21.53 13.65 - 2. Sadness Condition (Yes=1;No=0) 0.49 0.50 0.23** - 3. Western culture (Yes=1;No=0) 0.61 0.49 0.23** 0.17** - 4. Female (Female=1; Male=0) 0.38 0.48 -0.07 0.09* 0.00 - 5. Age 38.52 10.76 -0.02 -0.01 -0.15** -0.44 - 6. VSM2013 73.57 16.92 0.07 -0.01 -0.32** -0.08 -0.19** (0.83) 7. Other-concern 15.56 4.30 0.26* 0.38** 0.16** -0.04 0.06 -0.21** (0.90) 8. Manipulation check 10.17 2.43 0.37** 0.01 0.16** -0.11* 0.16** -0.06 0.32** (0.78)
This study uses PROCESS, and that is a computational tool helpful for analyzing conditional process modeling (Hayes, 2012). By doing this, we could establish that to what extent the effect of sadness expression on intended salary raise depends on people’s other-concern and cultural background. The PROCESS statistical model is presented in figure 2.
Figure 2: Module 8 ---statistical module (adopted from Hayes, 2012)
The independent variable salary raise is standardized to run moderated mediation. The module 8 is chosen to conduct moderated mediation analysis in Process (Hayes, 2012). Firstly, the p-value of interaction term Sadness *culture is checked for significance. The investigation could continue when the coefficient of interaction term is significant. The interaction term’s p-value of a3 is smaller than 0.05, which proves moderated mediation
exists and the analysis could continue.
The results are presented in table 4. R2=0.155 means the module explains 15.5% of the total variable and p<0.001 means it is statistically significant (Pushkarev, Davidson, & Mariev, 2017). In table 5, the control variables are added to the analysis. R-squared increases from 15.5% to 16.8%. The estimated coefficients slightly change.
c2 c1 c3 b1 a3 a2 a1 Sadness condition (X) Other-concern (M) Sadness * Culture (XW) Intended salary raise (Y) Cultural background (W)
Table 4:
Consequent
Other-concern (M) Intended Salary Raise(Y)
Antecedent Coeff. SE p Coeff. SE p
Sadness condition (X) a1 5.435 0.700 0.000 c’1 0.774 0.138 0.000 Other-concern (M) - - - - b1 0.028 0.008 0.001 Cultural background (W) a2 2.286 0.604 0.002 c’2 0.748 0.114 0.000 Sadness *culture (XW) a3 2.515 0.893 0.005 <0.05 c’3 0.812 0.168 0.000 Constant 9.602 0.438 0.000 i2 0.922 0.113 0.000 R2=0.165 R2=0.155 F(3,534) =34.96, p<0.001 F(4,534) =24.19, p<0.001
Cultural background Boot Effects Boot SE Boot LLCI Boot ULCI Conditional indirect effect of cultural background on intended salary raise with other-concern
Eastern 0.154 0.056 0.0541 0.2743
Western 0.083 0.033 0.0304 0.1603
4.3.1 Hypothesis 1
The estimated coefficient proves c’1 the hypothesis 1(H1: Sadness expression has a
positive effect on the intended salary raise.). c’1=0.774 means if it is sadness condition, the
intended salary raise will increase 77.4% (SE=0.138;p=0.00).
The interaction term Sadness *culture (a3 ) means how much the effect of sadness
expression on other-concern differs between western and eastern cultural background. The positive relationship means that the positive effect of perceiving sadness expression on other-concern depends on the cultural background of the employees. In the sadness condition, the difference between easterner and westerner in other-concern raise increases for 2.52 units. 4.3.2 Hypothesis 2
“a1” is the conditional effect of sadness condition on other-concern when the
relationship is influenced by cultural background. Other-concern is estimated to increase by 5.44 unit when the cultural background is eastern, and the difference is significant at 1% level. It approves the hypothesis 2a (H2a: There is a positive relationship between sadness
expression and other-concern.). b1=0.028 is the coefficient of other-concern, which indicates
a positive relationship between other-concern and the intended salary raise. With 1 unit increase in other-concern, the salary raise will increase by 2.8% (SE=0.008; p=0.000), which approves hypothesis 2b (H2b: There is a positive relationship between other-concern and intended salary raise.). So the positive effect of sadness expression on the intended salary raise is mediated by other-concern.
4.3.3 Hypothesis 3
c’3 indicates to what extent the effect of sadness expression on intended salary raise is
different between westerners and easterners. The positive sign means that the effect of sadness expression on intended salary raise does depend on people’s cultural background. If the sadness condition is presented, the difference between westerner and easterner choice in intended salary raise will increase by 81.2% at a 1% significance level.
The results show that the effect of sadness expression on intended salary raise is conditioned on the cultural background, and it is statistically significant at 1% level (c’3=0.794;p=0.000). The direct and indirect effects analysis when each effect is conditioned by cultural background. The direct effects between sadness expression on intended salary raise are only significant in eastern group, and the effects are statistically significant (Eastern: effect=0.78, SE=0. 14, LLCI=0.5111; ULCI=1.0559). While the direct effect is insignificant in western cultural background group (Western: effect=0.01,SE=0.32, LLCI=-0.2198; ULCI=0.1980). For the indirect effect, sadness expression’s impact on intended salary raise via other-concern is also significantly affected by both cultural backgrounds. The indirect effect is stronger for eastern cultural background (indirect effect= 0.15, SD=0.06; LLCI=0.0486; ULCI=0.2749), comparing to western group (indirect effect= 0.08, SD=0.32; LLCI=0.0301; ULCI=0.1579). In other words, the indirect effect moderated by cultural background is proved. So hypothesis 3 is approved. (H3: Culture backgrounds moderate the
positive relationship between sadness expression and intended salary raise, such that this relationship is stronger if the emotion recipient has an eastern cultural background.)
Table 5:
Consequent
Other-concern (M) Intended Salary Raise(Y)
Antecedent Coeff. SE p Coeff. SE p
Sadness condition (X) a1 5.637 0.693 0.000 c’1 0.784 0.139 0.001 Other-concern (M) - - - - b1 0.023 0.008 0.001 Cultural background (W) a2 2.104 0.607 0.001 c’2 0.755 0.114 0.000 Sadness *Culture (XW) a3 2.601 0.899 0.004 <0.05 c’3 0.794 0.168 0.000 Age 0.042 0.023 -0.005 0.004 0.185 Female -1.04 0.456 0.023 -0.175 0.085 0.041 Education 0.457 0.311 0.142 0.055 0.053 0.303 Job -0.242 0.141 0.086 0.015 0.025 0.538 Constant 8.076 1.3701 0.000 i2 -0.889 0.253 0.001 R2=0.181 R2=0.168 F=17.82, p<0.001 F=13.26, p<0.001 Cultural background(W)
Boot Effects Boot SE Boot LLCI Boot ULCI
Conditional indirect effect at intended salary raise for different cultural background
Eastern 0.154 0.057 0.0486 0.2749
Western 0.083 0.323 0.0301 0.1579
Other-concern (M) Boot Effects Boot SE Boot LLCI Boot ULCI
Conditional direct effect at intended salary raise with levels of cultural background
Eastern 0.7835 0.1387 0.5111 1.0559
Western 0.0109 0.3230 -0.2198 0.1980
Figure 3: a conceptual module with coefficients
H3a c’2=0.755** H3b a2=2.104** H3 H1 (+) c’1=0.784 ** H2a (+) a1=5.637** H2b (+) b1=0.023** H2 Sadness Expression (X) Intended salary raise (Y) Cultural background (W) Other-concern (M)
5. Conclusion and Discussion
In conclusion, The results show an indirect effect of the sadness expression (X) on the Intended salary raise (Y) through Other-concern (M) depend on the Cultural background (W). Also, the moderated mediation is exit. The effect of sadness expression (X) remains after accounting for an Intended salary raise (Y) depend on the Cultural background (W). It approves that culture backgrounds moderate the positive relationship between sadness expression and intended salary raise. This relationship is stronger if the emotion recipient has an eastern cultural background. The mediation effect approves that sadness expression has a positive effect on the intended salary raise. And there is a positive relationship between sadness expression and concern, as well as a positive relationship between other-concern and intended salary raise.
Results show sadness expression could elicit greater other-concern and in the end achieves better salary raise. So negotiators have better negotiation outcome by eliciting other-concern. And sadness expression could raise greater other-concern comparing with rational statement. However, sadness expressions might have some draw back. In the study of Van Kleef et al. (2006) finds that although disappointment or other supplication emotions could lead to greater help, the emotion expressers are likely to be associated with unfavorable feelings. Also, if the negotiation is jointly evaluated, the counter party would be less likely influenced.
The moderation effect of culture could be explained by the difference of individualism and collectivisms. The Hofstede model is widely used for cross culture analysis. It measures six dimension of national cultures, including Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism/Collectivism, Masculinity/Femininity, Long/Short Term Orientation, and Indulgence/Restraint (Hofstede, 2011; Hofstede et al., 2010 ). Power distance means to what extend the less powerful individual in the organization accept as well as expect the unequally
distribution of power. From the website of Hofstede Insight, we could compare culture value of countries. According to the sample data we collect, the most of the data is Chinese sample (N=379), the second is Americans (N=64), and Indian ranks the third (N=51). So we choose these three countries to compare their culture value. From the table we could find, the power distance of China (PDI=80) is twice as large as that of United States(PDI=40). And India has similar score as China (PDI=77). High score indicates that people are generally accept the inequalities of different social classes in both China and India. People accept their social class. People are strongly influenced by authorities, they are not tend to against superiors. As for Americans, the power distance index indicates the fact that people believes that individuals are not equal in societies, and that means people believe that everybody is unique and that implies individuals are unequal. Also, power is defined as the ability that to what extend a person could influence other people’s opinion and action. Individualism is defined as the degree of interdependence a society maintains among its members (Hofstede, 2011). The fundamental difference between individualism and collectivism is the self-image of “I” or “we”. In the individualism society, individuals are tend to only take care of themselves and direct family members. While in the collectivism society, individuals are tend to looking after other members in the same social group such as collogues in the same company. They are doing it in exchange for others’ loyalty. China has a score of 20, which means the culture is highly collectivism. People behave based on the group interests instead of their own interests. It means individuals are more likely to hire or give promotions to people who are in the same group. For example, people are inclined to hire or give promotion to their relatives or people recommended by acquaintances. India has an intermediate score (IDV=48), which means the society has both individualism and collectivism. The collectivism side can be explained by a individual’s preference to be in a large social group. Then they are expected to behave in line with the benefits of the whole group. In such social context, individuals’ behaviors are
influenced by others’ opinion, such as family members, friends, and surroundings. The relationship between employer and employee is built on expectations. According to Hofstede (2010), the loyalty of employee is based on the belief that their employer will protect them if they do something wrong. Similarly, their loyalty could earn future promotion by their employer. The individualism side is considered as the results of Hinduism philosophy. They believe that how they behave in this life will influence next life. So they are responsible for their behavior to have a good next life. America has the most score on individualism, as the society focuses and promotes equal right. Commonly, there is flat hierarchy in organizations. People are not afraid of questioning superiors. Managers or superiors works with other employees that in a same team and they are open to opinions. Employee frequently exchanges and consults information with manager. Also, business organization expect employees to be independent and rely on themselves to solve problems. The decision of hiring and promotion is based on individual’s own performance. So when easterners faces the request from employee, they may give higher salary raise in the consideration of exchanging loyalty. While westerners pay more attention to the actual performance. So it could explain that although westerners give higher salary raise in sadness condition, the difference with rational condition is quite small.
As for the limitations, the sample data is collected through a convenience sample instead of a probability sample. So there might be low external validity, because the excluded subjects might vary from the collected subjects. As a result, this study couldn’t guarantee the representativeness and generalizability of results.
6. Reference:
1. Shirako, A., Kilduff, G. J., & Kray, L. J. (2015). Is there a place for sympathy in negotiation? Finding strength in weakness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 131, 95-109.
2. Sinaceur, M., Kopelman, S., Vasiljevic, D., & Haag, C. (2015). Weep and get more: When and why sadness expression is effective in negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6), 1847.
3. Matsumoto, D., Yoo, S. H., Hirayama, S., & Petrova, G. (2005). Development and validation of a measure of display rule knowledge: the display rule assessment inventory. Emotion, 5(1), 23.
4. Matsumoto, D., Takeuchi, S., Andayani, S., Kouznetsova, N., & Krupp, D. (1998). The contribution of individualism vs. collectivism to cross‐national differences in display rules. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 147-165.
5. Mauss, I. B., & Robinson, M. D. (2009). Measures of emotion: A review. Cognition and emotion, 23(2), 209-237.
6. Koopmann-Holm, B., & Matsumoto, D. (2011). Values and display rules for specific emotions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(3), 355-371.
7. Desmet, P. (2003). Measuring emotion: Development and application of an instrument to measure emotional responses to products. In Funology (pp. 111-123). Springer Netherlands.
8. Soto, J. A., & Levenson, R. W. (2009). Emotion recognition across cultures: The influence of ethnicity on empathic accuracy and physiological linkage. Emotion, 9(6), 874.
9. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G., & Kurshid, A. (2000). Impact of culture on human resource management practices: A 10‐country
10. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?. Perspectives on psychological science, 6(1), 3-5.
11. Leary, K., Pillemer, J., & Wheeler, M. (2013). Negotiating with emotion. Harvard business review, 91(1-2), 96-103
12. Here's When Crying Can Actually Help You Win A Negotiation. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-crying-actually-help-win-203843877.html
13. Thompson, L. L., Wang, J., & Gunia, B. C. (2010). Negotiation. Annual review of psychology, 61, 491-515.
14. Morris, M. W., & Keltner, D. (2000). How emotions work: The social functions of
emotional expression in negotiations. Research in organizational behavior, 22, 1-50.
15. Van Kleef, G. A., & Côté, S. (2007). Expressing anger in conflict: when it helps and
when it hurts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1557.
16. Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K., & Manstead, A. S. (2004a). The interpersonal
effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 86(1), 57-76.
17. Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2004b). The interpersonal effects of emotions in negotiations: A motivated information processing approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 510– 528.
18. Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Pietroni, D., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006). Power and emotion in negotiations: Power moderates the interpersonal effects of anger and happiness on concession making. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 557–581.
19. Sinaceur, M., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Get mad and get more than even: When and
Psychology, 42(3), 314-322.
20. Allred, K. G. (1999). Anger and retaliation: Toward an understanding of impassioned conflict in organizations. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 7, 27–58.
21. Friedman, R., Anderson, C., Brett, J., Olekalns, M., Goates, N., & Lisco, C.
C. (2004). The positive and negative effects of anger on dispute resolution: Evidence from electronically mediated disputes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 369–376. 22. Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Pietroni, D., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006).
Power and emotion in negotiations: Power moderates the
interpersonal effects of anger and happiness on concession making. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 557–581.
23. Ekman, P. (1993). Facial expression and emotion. American Psychologist, 48(4), 384-392.
24. Fromm, D. (2017, July 19). Dealing With Your Emotions in Negotiations.Retrieved February 08, 2018, from https://www.negotiations.com/articles/emotions-feelings/
25. Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition.
Psychological Review, 110, 265–284.
26. Leventhal, G. D. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In L. Berkowitz &W. Walster (Eds.),
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 91–131). New York:
Academic Press.
27. Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43–55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
28. Clark, M. S., Pataki, S. P., & Carver, V. H. (1996). Some thoughts and findings on self-presentation of emotions in relationships. In G. J. O. Fletcher & J. Fitness (Eds.),
Knowledge structures in close relationships: A social psychological approach (pp. 247–274). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Affect, imagery, consciousness. Vol. 2: The negative affects. New York: Springer.
30. Barry, B., Fulmer, I. S., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2004). I laughed, I cried, I settled: The
role of emotion in negotiation. The handbook of negotiation and culture, 71-94.
31. Lorenzo, G. (2015, November 23). Could Showing Sadness Help You Get What You Want In A Negotiation? Retrieved January 28, 2018, from
https://www.fastcompany.com/3053716/could-showing-sadness-help-you-get-what-you-want-in-a-negotiation
32. Lim, N. (2016). Cultural differences in emotion: differences in emotional arousal level
between the East and the West. Integrative medicine research, 5(2), 105-109.
33. Tsai, J. L., Levenson, R. W., & McCoy, K. (2006). Cultural and temperamental variation in emotional response. Emotion, 6(3), 484.
34. Kunzmann, U., & Grühn, D. (2005). Age differences in emotional reactivity: the sample case of sadness. Psychology and aging, 20(1), 47.
35. Neuman, 2012. Understanding Research. Boston, MA: Pearson Ed.
36. Sue, V.M, and Ritter, L.A. (2007) Conducting Online Surveys. London: Sage
37. Podsakoff et al., (2012). Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and recommendations on how to control it. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 63:539–69
38. Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling.
39. Pushkarev, A., Davidson, N., & Mariev, O. (2017, March). External Factors of Involvement in Innovation Activities: Example of Russian Firms. In ECIC 2017-9th European Conference on Intellectual Capital (p. 261). Academic Conferences and
publishing limited.
40. Bondrea, A. A., Geangu, I. P., Gârdan, D. A., & Cretoiu, R. (2014). Consumer rights protection in the context of online marketing research. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, 6(1), 451.
41. Seymen, O. A. (2006). Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 13(4), 296-315.
42. Sower, V. E., & Sower, J. C. (2004). Moderator Variables in Cultural Values and Business Ethics Research: Important to External Validity. Southwest Business & Economics Journal, 13.
43. Wilken, R., Jacob, F., & Prime, N. (2013). The ambiguous role of cultural moderators in intercultural business negotiations. International Business Review, 22(4), 736-753. 44.
