Search

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-hum-10.1177_00187267211002905 for The (mostly) robust influence of initial trustworthiness beliefs on subsequent behaviors and perceptions by Rachel L Campagna, Alexandra A Mislin, Kurt T Dirks and Hillary Anger Elfenbein in Human Relations

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-hum-10.1177_00187267211002905 for The (mostly) robust influence of initial trustworthiness beliefs on subsequent behaviors and perceptions by Rachel L Campagna, Alexandra A Mislin, Kurt T Dirks and Hillary Anger Elfenbein in Human Relations

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-psp-10.1177_01461672211029786 for What Do We Hear in the Voice? An Open-Ended Judgment Study of Emotional Speech Prosody by Hillary Anger Elfenbein, Petri Laukka, Jean Althoff, Wanda Chui, Frederick K. Iraki, Thomas Rockstuhl and Nutankumar S. Thingujam in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-psp-10.1177_01461672211029786 for What Do We Hear in the Voice? An Open-Ended Judgment Study of Emotional Speech Prosody by Hillary Anger Elfenbein, Petri Laukka, Jean Althoff, Wanda Chui, Frederick K. Iraki, Thomas Rockstuhl and Nutankumar S. Thingujam in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-psp-10.1177_01461672211029786 for What Do We Hear in the Voice? An Open-Ended Judgment Study of Emotional Speech Prosody by Hillary Anger Elfenbein, Petri Laukka, Jean Althoff, Wanda Chui, Frederick K. Iraki, Thomas Rockstuhl and Nutankumar S. Thingujam in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-psp-10.1177_01461672211029786 for What Do We Hear in the Voice? An Open-Ended Judgment Study of Emotional Speech Prosody by Hillary Anger Elfenbein, Petri Laukka, Jean Althoff, Wanda Chui, Frederick K. Iraki, Thomas Rockstuhl and Nutankumar S. Thingujam in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

The posterior probability distributions (and 95% credible intervals) of the joint accuracy of the appraisal-theory based predictions about participants’ judgments of vocal expressions. Colours indicate speaker and perceiver culture: solid blue lines = Australian stimuli, Australian participants; dotted blue lines = Australian stimuli, Indian participants; solid orange lines = Indian stimuli, Indian participants; dotted orange lines = Indian stimuli, Australian participants; black solid lines = average across all conditions.

Participants’ mean ratings (and boxplots) of appraisal dimensions (z scores) as a function of the intended emotion of the vocal expressions. Error bars indicate 95% credible intervals and shaded areas indicate direction of theoretical predictions. Diamonds indicate mean appraisal ratings and the colour of the diamonds indicates if the associated Bayes Factor (BF) supports the prediction (green, BF > 3), supports a population mean close to zero (red, BF < 1/3), or if both hypotheses are equally likely (black, 3 > BF > 1/3). Thirty-one out of 36 (86%) mean ratings were in the predicted direction. For the remaining 5 predictions, 3 (8%) gave support for a mean close to zero and 2 (6%) did not support one hypothesis over the other.

The posterior probability distributions (and 95% credible intervals) for the percentage of Bayes Factors that supported no difference (BF < 1/3) between Australian and Indian participants’ ratings are shown for each appraisal dimension.

The rapidly growing body of research on the effect of emotional expressions in negotiation has been the subject of several narrative reviews. Through meta-analysis, we combine relevant findings, compare and integrate moderators, and examine the mediating mechanisms quantitatively. The analysis incorporates 64 published and unpublished studies conducted over three decades. The findings suggest that, generally, negotiators expressing negative emotions will increase counterparts’ concession-making, which presumably enables them to claim more individual value. Expressing negative emotions diminishes trust and other subjective outcomes. Relationships between negative emotions and negotiation outcomes are moderated by factors that are both theoretical (i.e., power, culture, emotion regulation) and methodological (i.e., characteristics of research design, phases of negotiation). Additionally, we tested theoretical frameworks from Emotions as Social Information theory, which describes the processes through which negative emotions influence negotiation outcomes. The effects for concessions are mediated by inference of limits, inference of toughness, and affective reactions. The effect of negative emotions on individual outcomes is mediated by complementary affective reactions. Based on the existing body of work, we make specific calls for further research. Refereed/Peer-reviewed