IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v33y2024i6d10.1007_s10726-024-09901-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deception in Negotiations: Making People More Honest with a Two-Factor Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Camille Srour

    (CLLE, Université de Toulouse, CNRS)

  • Jacques Py

    (CLLE, Université de Toulouse, CNRS)

Abstract

Dematerialized negotiations are increasing and tend to foster deceptive exchanges, while also limiting the ability to detect signs of deception. We therefore tested whether it was possible to deter negotiators from producing deceptive statements in the first place, by manipulating the mental conflict of lying (Dissonance factor) and increasing the perceived risk of being disbelieved if lying (Risk factor). A total of 458 participants were recruited online and placed in a buyer/supplier email negotiation scenario in one of eight experimental groups, manipulating the Dissonance factor (using, or not, a “you have the reputation of being honest and trustworthy” pro-social labeling technique), and Risk factor (three price levels of an alleged alternative offer and a control group). They were ultimately, as suppliers, asked their own purchasing price by the buyer—a highly sensitive piece of information. Results showed that the proportion of participants giving a true price in response to the question of their own purchasing price was significantly higher when they were exposed to our deception deterrence factors. Of the participants who did not dodge the question entirely, 38.1% of the control condition (no Dissonance, no Risk factor) gave their true purchasing price, compared to 80.8% in the combined Dissonance/Highest Risk factor level condition. Professionals can thus use simple theory-based deception deterrence factors to make their counterpart more honest in negotiations.

Suggested Citation

  • Camille Srour & Jacques Py, 2024. "Deception in Negotiations: Making People More Honest with a Two-Factor Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 1471-1494, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:33:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-024-09901-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-024-09901-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-024-09901-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-024-09901-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michèle Belot & Jeroen Ven, 2017. "How private is private information? The ability to spot deception in an economic game," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 19-43, March.
    2. Strudler, Alan, 1995. "On the Ethics of Deception in Negotiation," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 805-822, October.
    3. Chandrashekaran, Rajesh & Grewal, Dhruv, 2006. "Anchoring effects of advertised reference price and sale price: The moderating role of saving presentation format," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(10-11), pages 1063-1071, October.
    4. Mara Olekalns & Philip Smith, 2007. "Loose with the Truth: Predicting Deception in Negotiation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 225-238, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dwenger, Nadja & Lohse, Tim, 2019. "Do individuals successfully cover up their lies? Evidence from a compliance experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 74-87.
    2. SimanTov-Nachlieli, Ilanit & Har-Vardi, Liron & Moran, Simone, 2020. "When negotiators with honest reputations are less (and more) likely to be deceived," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 68-84.
    3. Kukla-Gryz Anna & Zagórska Katarzyna, 2017. "The effects of individual internal versus external reference prices on consumer decisions for pay-what-you-want payments," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 4(51), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Joo Young Jeon & Chulyoung Kim & Sang-Hyun Kim, 2021. "Gender Differences in Repeated Dishonest Behavior: Experimental Evidence," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-11, May.
    5. Joseph P. Gaspar & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2021. "Confident and Cunning: Negotiator Self-Efficacy Promotes Deception in Negotiations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 139-155, June.
    6. Claude Alavoine, 2014. "Unethical Practices in Negotiations. The Confrontation between Internal and External Factors," Working Papers 2014-223, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    7. Cheng, Andong & Baskin, Ernest, 2021. "Disproportionate redemption discounting: Mental accounting of discounted credit," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 156-163.
    8. Filipe Sobral & Gazi Islam, 2013. "Ethically Questionable Negotiating: The Interactive Effects of Trust, Competitiveness, and Situation Favorability on Ethical Decision Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(2), pages 281-296, October.
    9. Shirako, Aiwa & Kilduff, Gavin J. & Kray, Laura J., 2015. "Is there a place for sympathy in negotiation? Finding strength in weakness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 95-109.
    10. Minson, Julia A. & VanEpps, Eric M. & Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2018. "Eliciting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth: The effect of question phrasing on deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 76-93.
    11. Lohse, Tim & Qari, Salmai, 2021. "Gender differences in face-to-face deceptive behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 1-15.
    12. Chu, Hsunchi & Liao, Shuling, 2010. "Buying while expecting to sell: The economic psychology of online resale," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 1073-1078, September.
    13. Belot, Michèle & van de Ven, Jeroen, 2019. "Is dishonesty persistent?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    14. Friesen, Mark, 2020. "A dynamic perspective on consumers’ price fairness perception: Empirical evidence from the airline industry," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 74(4), pages 403-425.
    15. Matthew Caulfield, 2021. "Pay Secrecy, Discrimination, and Autonomy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(2), pages 399-420, June.
    16. Tobey Scharding, 2019. "Individual Actions and Corporate Moral Responsibility: A (Reconstituted) Kantian Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(4), pages 929-942, February.
    17. Mara Olekalns & Philip Smith, 2009. "Mutually Dependent: Power, Trust, Affect and the Use of Deception in Negotiation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 347-365, March.
    18. Ahmetoglu, Gorkan & Furnham, Adrian & Fagan, Patrick, 2014. "Pricing practices: A critical review of their effects on consumer perceptions and behaviour," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 696-707.
    19. Andrews, Melinda L. & Benedicktus, Ray L. & Brady, Michael K., 2010. "The effect of incentives on customer evaluations of service bundles," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 71-76, January.
    20. Anthony M. Gould & Jean‐Etienne Joullié & Kate Gould, 2024. "First things first: Unselfconscious corporate virtuosity and corporate performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 692-706, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:33:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-024-09901-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.