Anticipating Happiness in a Future Negotiation: Anticipated Happiness, Propensity to Initiate a Negotiation, and Individual Outcomes

We examined the role of anticipated happiness in negotiation settings. Anticipated happiness is the happiness that individuals expect to experience in the future if certain events do or do not occur. In two studies, we tested the argument that anticipated happiness initiates an approach goal, leading individuals to promote economic interests. Study 1 revealed that anticipated happiness was positively related to the propensity to initiate a negotiation, mediated by an approach goal. In Study 2, we found that anticipated happiness about reaching the target value increased the individual negotiation outcome, mediated by actual target value. Our studies provide insight into how anticipated happiness influences motivation, behavior, and ultimately individual outcomes in negotiations. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: We would like to thank Center for Research in Economics and Strategy (CRES) at Washington University in St. Louis for funding our first study. We also appreciate the feedback from the editor and reviewers of Negotiation and Conflict Management Research and two anonymous reviewers of the 23rd annual meeting of International Association for Conflict Management. Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 2 Emotions perform informational and regulatory functions. They can guide judgment and decision making and motivate information processing and behavior (Peters, Västfjäall, Gärling, & Slovic, 2006). Negotiations are one such judgment and decision making process (Bazerman & Carroll, 1987; Neale & Bazerman, 1985; Thompson, 1990; Thompson & Hastie, 1990), which is infused with emotions (Barry, 2008; Barry & Oliver, 1996; Druckman & Olekalns, 2008). The majority of negotiation research on emotions has focused on examining the effects of experienced or immediate emotions. This line of research has demonstrated that emotions experienced during a negotiation have significant effects on negotiator cognition and behavior, thus influencing negotiation processes and outcomes (Barry & Oliver, 1996; Brett, Olekalns, Friedman, Goates, Anderson, & Lisco, 2007; Campagna, Kong, Mislin, & Bottom, 2011; Friedman, Anderson, Brett, Olekalns, Goates, & Lisco, 2004; Hegtvedt & Killian, 1999; Kong & Bottom, 2010; Van Kleef, De Dreu, & Manstead, 2004, 2006; Wood & Schweitzer, 2011). In addition to ―real time‖ phenomena, ruminating on future events also may be important. Thinking about the future is an important component of human cognition (Atance & O’Neill, 2001) and almost all types of decisions involve predictions about future feelings (March, 1978). While previous research has uncovered the role of emotions that arise during a negotiation, it has not examined how anticipated emotions influence negotiator behavior and outcomes. Anticipated emotions are one component of the foreseen consequences of a decision. They are emotions that individuals expect to experience in the future if certain events do or do not occur (Baumgartner, Pieters, & Bagozzi, 2008; Loewenstein, 2000; Loewenstein, Weber, Hsee, & Welch, 2001). It is a well-established finding that individuals come to negotiation settings with expectations regarding their outcomes (Barry & Oliver, 1996; O’Connor, Arnold, & Burris, 2005; Patton & Balakrishnan, 2009; Raiffa, 1982; Rubin, Kim, & Peretz, 1990), formulating predictions about Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 3 how they would feel if they do or do not achieve these outcomes. Predictions about how one would feel in response to future negotiation outcomes may be as critical as immediate emotions in influencing present decisions and strategies (Baumeister, Vohs, DeWall, & Zhang, 2007; Van Boven & Ashworth, 2007). In this paper, we focus on anticipated happiness – happiness that individuals expect to experience if certain events do or do not occur – and examine how it relates to the propensity to initiate a negotiation and to negotiation outcomes. Generally, negotiations have been conceptualized as anxiety-inducing situations (Babcock, Gelfand, Small, & Stayn, 2006; Wood & Schweitzer, 2011). Accordingly, some individuals view an upcoming negotiation as a threat, anticipating an unfavorable outcome and feeling the associated negative emotions. On the other hand, others perceive negotiations as a challenge, especially when they believe that they have the resources to meet the situational demands (O’Connor, Arnold, & Maurizio, 2010). We argue that such expectations of positive negotiation outcomes heighten anticipated happiness, which would act as a motivational force (Raghunathan & Trope, 2002; Trope & Neter, 1994) in coping with the demands of a negotiation. Based on regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997, 1998; Higgins, Roney, Crowe, & Hymes, 1994), we assert that imagining how good it would feel to achieve a desired outcome before negotiating will direct negotiators’ focus and motivation on achieving these outcomes. This motivational orientation would be reflected in the desire to initiate a negotiation in the absence of explicit cues that demand it and lead negotiators to set high aspirations, ultimately advancing self-interest. In the following section, we further discuss the notion of anticipated happiness and distinguish it from related constructs. Then, we discuss how anticipated happiness prompts a Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 4 self-regulatory process that increases the propensity to initiate a negotiation and individual negotiation outcome. Anticipated Happiness Anticipated emotions result from prefactual appraisals (Gleicher, Boninger, Strathman, Armor, & Ahn, 1995) or mental simulations of future events (Baumgartner et al., 2008). Mental simulations are imagined representations or cognitive constructions of future events (Taylor & Schneider, 1989). When engaged in mentally simulating future events, individuals imagine themselves in the situation and predict the potential consequences of the event, which may even lead them to experience its potential effects (Kahneman & Tversky, 1982; Pham & Taylor, 1999; Taylor & Pham, 1996; Taylor, Pham, Rivkin, & Armor, 1998; Taylor & Schneider, 1989). When mentally simulating an event associated with desirable outcomes, individuals experience high levels of anticipated happiness. Previous research has primarily focused on outcome-based anticipated emotions (e.g., Perugini & Bagozzi, 2001; Richard, van der Pligt, & de Vries, 1996), examining how individuals would feel in response to the outcome of a future event. Research on mental simulation, on the other hand, has maintained that individuals also could simulate the underlying process of an event (Taylor et al., 1998) and anticipate feeling emotions along the way. For example, individuals may expect pleasant or unpleasant negotiation processes with their counterparts and anticipate feeling positive or negative emotions during the negotiation. However, the extant research has not fully informed us about whether individuals can anticipate experiencing certain emotions in the process of an event without thinking about its consequences. Accordingly, we Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 5 focused primarily on outcome-based anticipated happiness (i.e., how happy one anticipates feeling if a positive negotiation outcome is achieved) in negotiations. Anticipated happiness is related to, but conceptually distinct from state (situational) and trait (dispositional) optimism (Armor & Taylor, 1998) (see Table 1 for distinctions among the constructs). Anticipated happiness is an affective reaction that is expected to be experienced in the future in response to the outcome of an event. It relates to the question of ―How would I feel if X happened or did not happen?‖ State optimism, on the other hand, is an anticipatory affective reaction that individuals experience in the present in response to the prospect of a future event (Baumgartner et al., 2008). It relates to the question of ―What is the likelihood of X happening in the future?‖ Although distinct constructs, anticipated happiness possibly can influence state optimism such that anticipating happiness in the future may lead an individual to experience happiness at present or vice versa. In contrast, trait optimism is a stable personality trait, not driven by the situation. That is, some individuals are generally more optimistic than others regardless of the situation they encounter. However, the two constructs are related in that optimistic individuals may perceive a high likelihood of positive outcomes happening to them in the future, thus experiencing high levels of anticipated happiness. -------------------------------------Insert Table 1 about here -------------------------------------Anticipated Happiness and Self-Regulation Research on anticipated emotions has not clearly specified how anticipated emotions influence behaviors (e.g., Perugini & Bagozzi, 2001; Perugini & Conner, 2000). However, the research on mental simulations has provided insight (Baumeister et al., 2007). Mental Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 6 simulations help individuals construct their future reality (Taylor & Schneider, 1989), making events seem more concrete, decreasing the psychological distance between the present and the future (Taylor & Schneider, 1989; Taylor et al., 1998). By increasing the psychological proximity of a pleasant future event, mental simulations increase the subjective likelihood of goal attainment and the subjective value of the goal (Atkinson & Birch, 1974; Kahneman & Tversky, 1982; Pham & Taylor, 1999; Taylor et al., 1998). These two subjective perceptions are independent, yet often interact to predict motivation for action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1981; Ajzen, 1991; Atkinson, 1964; Eccles et al., 1983; Feather, 1982; Bagozzi, 1981; Brehm & Self, 1989; Oettingen, Bulgarella, Henderson, & Gollwitzer, 2004; Vroom, 1964; Wright & Brehm, 1989). This motivation activates self-regulatory processes such as approach and avoidance, depending on the goal (Taylor & Pham, 1996; Taylor et al., 1998; Taylor & Schneider, 1989). Taylor et al. (1998) argued that ―[a]n important [and vital] function of mental simulations is that they produce links to action by virtue of the self-regulatory activities they evoke‖ (p.431). Goals are broadly defined as ―representational structures that guide the system in its pursuit of a reference or end state‖ (Markman & Brendl, 2000, p.98). Desirable end states instigate a self-regulation process focused on approach goals whereas undesirable end states prompt avoidance goals (Higgins, 1987). Approach goals are related to reaching aspirations, growth, and accomplishment whereas avoidance goals are related to security and safety (Higgins, 1997, 1998). These goals evoke motivational orientations that guide cognition and behavior (Friedman & Förster, 2001; Higgins, Shah, & Friedman, 1997). For example, approach goals are usually associated with a focus on positive meanings such as success and hence can promote risk taking behavior to meet objectives. Conversely, avoidance goals are associated with a focus on Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 7 negative meanings and lead to risk aversion to maintain a safe distance from an undesired end state (Crowe & Higgins, 1997; Liberman, Idson, Camacho, & Higgins, 1999). The majority of research on self-regulatory systems have treated regulatory foci as individual differences; however regulatory foci as the way individuals approach desired endstates and avoid undesired end-states can be induced by situational cues such as feedback (Roney, Higgins, & Shah, 1995), task contingency (Roney et al., 1995), the framing of rewards systems (Higgins, 2000), and the priming of hopes or duties (Higgins, 2000). We argue that anticipated happiness as a situational factor would instigate an approach goal related to attaining positive economic outcomes, which would be manifested in the willingness to initiate a negotiation and maximizing individual gain. It should be noted that anticipated happiness is a future-oriented emotional reaction to an occurrence (or not) of a future event or outcome. It is different from promotion focus, which arises as the current/immediate inclination toward the desirable end-state. Anticipated Happiness and Self-Regulation in Negotiation Prior to negotiating, individuals tend to appraise the upcoming negotiation in terms of situational demands (primary appraisal) and whether they possess the resources to meet these demands (secondary appraisal) (O’Connor et al., 2010). If negotiators perceive that their resources exceed the demands of the situation, they would develop positive feelings about the negotiation outcomes, perceiving the negotiation as a reasonable challenge and/or an opportunity to gain access to resources. Conversely, negotiators may perceive the future negotiation as a threat if they believe that the demands of the situation exceed their capacity. Negotiators with Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 8 challenge appraisals are more likely to anticipate positive emotions than those with threat appraisals. Initiating negotiations entails both potential benefits and costs as it increases the possibility of achieving gains while simultaneously making one vulnerable to others’ exploitative actions. We argue that anticipated happiness would evoke an approach goal, focusing attention on gains (Higgins, 1997, 1998) such that the future negotiation is perceived as an opportunity to improve the current situation rather than as a threat. This, in turn, would increase the propensity to initiate a negotiation in the absence of any externally-induced demands. Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relationship between anticipated happiness related to initiating a negotiation and the propensity to initiate a negotiation, mediated by an approach goal. In the negotiation context, approach goals are related to the value that negotiator hope to achieve (Pruitt & Drews, 1969) and have been operationalized as the ―level of aspiration‖ (Siegel & Fouraker, 1960) and ―target point‖ (Walton & McKersie, 1965). Avoidance goals are related to the value negotiators find minimally acceptable (Pruitt & Drews, 1969) and have been examined as the ―resistance point‖ (Walton & McKersie, 1965) and ―reservation price‖ (Raiffa, 1982). We argue that anticipated happiness – by promoting approach goals – will lead negotiators to set a high target point, which typically leads to a high individual outcome (Galinsky, Leonardelli, Okhuysen, & Mussweiler, 2005; Siegel & Fouraker, 1960; White & Neale, 1994). Thus, Hypothesis 2: There is a positive relationship between anticipated happiness related to reaching the target point and the individual negotiation outcome, mediated by the target point. Anticipated Happiness in Negotiation 9 We tested these hypotheses in two studies. In Study 1, using a scenario methodology, we examined how anticipated happiness about the initiation of a negotiation was related to the propensity to initiate a negotiation (Hypotheses 1). In the second study, we examined how anticipated happiness about reaching the target point was related to individual outcomes (Hypothesis 2) in a face-to-face, dyadic negotiation setting.