The Effect of Screen Size and E-Communication Richness on Negotiation Performance

AbstractUsing an empirical study, this paper investigated how each screen size and different presentation modes (video or text-only) can trigger meaningful differences when interacting with a partner in a negotiation. In a simulated multi-issue negotiation between a buyer and a seller, participants were instructed to communicate through either a large (laptop) or small (mobile phone) screen in either a video conversation or a text-based communication. The findings revealed that (a) negotiators communicating through a large screen performed better than negotiators interacting via small screen; (b) negotiators communicating through video conversation performed better than negotiators interacting via text-based communication; (c) negotiators communicating through video conversation formed higher levels of trust and satisfaction than negotiators interacting via text-based communication; and (d) negotiators communicating through video conversations over large screens achieved the highest joint outcome. Implications for the use of technology during negotiations is discussed, with attention given to the need to preserve more naturalistic cues through larger screens and the use of video conversations for best effect.

[1]  Norah E. Dunbar,et al.  Testing the Interactivity Principle: Effects of Mediation, Propinquity, and Verbal and Nonverbal Modalities in Interpersonal Interaction , 2002 .

[2]  Joey F. George,et al.  The Influences of Deception and Computer-Mediation on Dyadic Negotiations , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[3]  Joyce E. Bono,et al.  Core self‐evaluations: a review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job performance , 2003 .

[4]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Research Note. Electronic Brainstorming: Illusions and Patterns of Productivity , 1999, Inf. Syst. Res..

[5]  Joann M. Montepare,et al.  Impressions of Babyfaced Individuals Across the Life Span , 1992 .

[6]  M. Lombard.  Direct Responses to People on the Screen , 1995 .

[7]  B. Detenber,et al.  A Bio‐Informational Theory of Emotion: Motion and Image Size Effects on Viewers , 1996 .

[8]  C. Tu,et al.  The Relationship of Social Presence and Interaction in Online Classes , 2002 .

[9]  Michael Woodworth,et al.  The dark side of negotiation: Examining the outcomes of face-to-face and computer-mediated negotiations among dark personalities , 2016 .

[10]  Jeanne M. Brett,et al.  Culture and Negotiation , 2000 .

[11]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Media, Tasks, and Communication Processes: A Theory of Media Synchronicity , 2008, MIS Q..

[12]  L. Gilson,et al.  Virtual Teams Research , 2015 .

[13]  T J Triggs,et al.  Apparent Size and Distance in an Imaging Display , 1992, Human factors.

[14]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Personality and job satisfaction: the mediating role of job characteristics. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[15]  K. Dirks,et al.  The Repair of Trust: A Dynamic Bilateral Perspective and Multilevel Conceptualization , 2009 .

[16]  L. L. Cummings,et al.  The Organizational Trust Inventory (OTI): Development and validation. , 1996 .

[17]  A. H. Brayfield,et al.  AN INDEX OF JOB SATISFACTION , 1951 .

[18]  Stanley N. Roscoe,et al.  The eyes prefer real images , 1991 .

[19]  Joseph P. Forgas,et al.  Affective Influences on Judgments and Behavior in Organizations: An Information Processing Perspective , 2001 .

[20]  D. Rutter,et al.  Looking and Seeing: The Role of Visual Communication in Social Interaction , 1984 .

[21]  D. Ferrin,et al.  Interpersonal trust within negotiations: : Meta-analytic evidence, critical contingencies, and directions for future research. , 2014 .

[22]  A J J A Scherpbier,et al.  Comparison of text and video cases in a postgraduate problem‐based learning format , 2005, Medical education.

[23]  Amira Galin,et al.  E-negotiation versus face-to-face negotiation what has changed - if anything? , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[24]  An Nguyen.  The current status and potential development of online news consumption: A structural approach , 2003, First Monday.

[25]  L. Weingart,et al.  Unilateral concessions from the other party: concession behavior, attributions, and negotiation judgments. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[26]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Mobile Persuasion: Can Screen Size and Presentation Mode Make a Difference to Trust? , 2016 .

[27]  Jillian R. Phillips,et al.  Media richness, user trust, and perceptions of corporate social responsibility: An experimental investigation of visual web site disclosures , 2009 .

[28]  Byron Reeves,et al.  The effects of screen size and message content on attention and arousal Media Psychology , 1999 .

[29]  D. Rutter.  Communicating by telephone , 1987 .

[30]  C. Gunawardena.  Social Presence Theory and Implications for Interaction and Collaborative Learning in Computer Conferences , 1995 .

[31]  Terri R. Kurtzberg.  Creative Thinking, a Cognitive Aptitude, and Integrative Joint Gain: A Study of Negotiator Creativity , 1998 .

[32]  J. Walther.  Interaction Through Technological Lenses , 2012 .

[33]  John O. Summers,et al.  An Initial Evaluation of Industrial Buyers' Impressions of Salespersons' Nonverbal Cues , 2002 .

[34]  Crispin Thurlow,et al.  Computer Mediated Communication , 2004 .

[35]  Steven C. Currall,et al.  Measuring trust between organizational boundary role persons. , 1995 .

[36]  Robert B. Lount,et al.  The role of affect in knowledge transfer. , 2010 .

[37]  Matthew Lombard,et al.  At the Heart of It All: The Concept of Presence , 2006 .

[38]  S. J. Motowidlo,et al.  Why visual and vocal interview cues can affect interviewers' judgments and predict job performance. , 1999 .

[39]  Sara B. Kiesler,et al.  Affect in Computer-Meditated Communication: An Experiment in Synchronous Terminal-to-Terminal Discussion , 1985, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[40]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[41]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

[42]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[43]  J Predebon,et al.  The Influence of Object Familiarity on Magnitude Estimates of Apparent Size , 1992, Perception.

[44]  Neomy Storch,et al.  The nature of negotiations in face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication in pair interactions , 2016 .

[45]  R. Liden,et al.  Interviewer perceptions of applicant qualifications: A multivariate field study of demographic characteristics and nonverbal cues. , 1984 .

[46]  Joseph P. Forgas,et al.  Affect and information processing strategies: An interactive relationship. , 2000 .

[47]  L. Thompson.  Information exchange in negotiation , 1991 .

[48]  Daantje Derks,et al.  Emoticons and social interaction on the Internet: the importance of social context , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[49]  Robin van Koert.  E-media in development: Combining multiple e-media types , 2003, First Monday.

[50]  R. Fisher,et al.  Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving in , 1981 .

[51]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Verbal and nonverbal cues in the perception of lying. , 1978 .

[52]  R. Rice.  Task Analyzability, Use of New Media, and Effectiveness: A Multi-Site Exploration of Media Richness , 1992 .

[53]  A. Hayes.  Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach , 2013 .

[54]  Jonah A. Berger.  Beyond Viral: Interpersonal Communication in the Internet Age , 2013 .

[55]  Richard Gonzalez,et al.  The correlational analysis of dyad‐level data in the distinguishable case , 1999 .

[56]  Uday S. Murthy,et al.  The effects of reward structure, media richness and gender on virtual teams , 2009, Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst..

[57]  Darren Gergle,et al.  Effects of four computer-mediated communications channels on trust development , 2002, CHI.