The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why Anger and Disappointment Affect Other’s Bargaining Behavior Differently: The Moderating Role of Power and the Mediating Role of Reciprocal and Complementary Emotions
Abstract
In two experiments, the authors investigated the interpersonal effects of anger and disappointment in negotiations. Whereas previous research focused on the informational inferences that bargainers make based on others' emotions, this article emphasizes the importance of affective reactions. The findings of this study show that anger evoked a complementary emotion (fear) in targets when reported by a high-power bargainer but evoked a reciprocal emotion (anger) when reported by a low-power bargainer. This reciprocal anger led participants to offer less to low-power counterparts who reported anger. Disappointed bargainers, however, evoked a complementary emotion (guilt) in participants and increased offers, regardless of the bargainer's power position.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, negotiation studies indicate that verbal as well as nonverbal expressions of disappointment and worry can elicit concessions from counterparts (Lelieveld et al. 2012(Lelieveld et al. , 2013;;Van Kleef et al. 2006).”
From The Social Effects of Emotions (2022) · cites this paper as Lelieveld et al. 2012
In the citing paper
“lower-power partners experienced more fear when confronted with a higher-power counterpart's verbal expressions of anger than vice versa”
From The Social Effects of Emotions (2022) · cites this paper as Lelieveld et al. 2012
Citations
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879 · Cited by 34,117
SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03206553 · Cited by 17,383
Journal of personality and social psychology
Armstrong, J. (1988) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/0169-2070(88)90126-4 · Cited by 10,544
Handbook of Affective Sciences
(2002) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195126013.001.0001 · Cited by 5,113
An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining
Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7 · Cited by 4,868
Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving in
Fisher, R. D., Ury, W., & Patton, B. M. (1987) · Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) · Cited by 3,771
The ripple effect: emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior
Barsade, S. G. (2002) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094912 · Cited by 3,361
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.146 · Cited by 3,325
Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2000) · Cognition & Emotion · doi:10.1080/026999300402763 · Cited by 3,171
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lerner, J. S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., & Kassam, K. S. (2015) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115043 · Cited by 2,913
The Social Effects of Emotions
van Kleef, G. A., & Côté, S. (2022) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-010855 · Cited by 534
Power: Past findings, present considerations, and future directions.
Galinsky, A. D., Rucker, D. D., & Magee, J. C. (2014) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/14344-016 · Cited by 296
The persuasive power of emotions: Effects of emotional expressions on attitude formation and change.
Van Kleef, G. A., van den Berg, H., & Heerdink, M. W. (2015) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000003 · Cited by 242
Weidman, A. C., Steckler, C. M., & Tracy, J. L. (2016) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/emo0000226 · Cited by 242
Metadata
- Authors
- Lelieveld, G.-J., Van Dijk, E., Van Beest, I., & Van Kleef, G. A.
- Affiliations
- Leiden University (NL)
- Tilburg University (NL)
- University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-05-23
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1209-1221
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2156187994
- Cited by
- 129
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 24.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Conflict Management and Negotiation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
- Keywords
- anger, disappointment, negotiation behavior, negotiation, affective reactions, power positions, guilt, fear
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Anger, Emotions, Fear, Female, Guilt, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Power, Psychological, Negotiating, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
