Skip to main content
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105.20.2.57

Negotiations between three or more parties are more complex than dyadic negotiations concerning the integration of various interests. In this study, we investigated negotiation in a collaborative virtual environment. We focused specifically on communication channels and their impact on negotiation in three-person groups. Three conditions of media richness were varied in the collaborative virtual environment: text chat, audio channel, and a combination of both. Furthermore, various nonverbal signals and a function for taking notes were available to the participants in every condition. The results show that participants in the conditions with audio channel and with audio channel and text chat are more satisfied with the communication process and need less time to find a solution. The quality of the negotiated result does not differ between the conditions. Adding text chat to the audio channel does not enhance the potential of solving negotiation problems. Audio-based communication seems to meet the requirements of negotiating better than text chat in terms of a more satisfying and faster communication process.

References

  • Adams, S.J. , Roch, S.G. , Ayman, R. (2005). Communication medium and member familiarity: The effects on decision time, accuracy, and satisfaction. Small Group Research, 36, 321–353. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Allmendinger, K. (2005). Passung von Medium und Aufgabentyp: Der Einfluss nonverbaler Signale in desktop-basierten kollaborativen virtuellen Umgebungen [Fit between medium and task type: The influence of nonverbal signals in desktop-based collaborative virtual environments]. Retrieved March 24, 2007, from w210.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/dbt/volltexte/2005/1658 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Arunachalam, V. , & Dilla, W.N. (1995). Judgement accuracy and outcomes in negotiation: A causal modeling analysis of decision-aiding effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 289–304. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Baltes, B.B. , Dickson, M.W. , Sherman, M.P. , Bauer, C.C. , LaGanke, J.S. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 156–179. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bazerman, M.H. , Curhan, J.R. , Moore, D.A. , Valley, K.L. (2000). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 279–314. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Beersma, B. , De Dreu, C.K.W. (2002). Integrative and distributive negotiation in small groups: Effects of task structure, decision rule, and social motive. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 227–252. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Binder, J. (2005). Konfliktmanagement in multilateralen Verhandlungen [Managing conflicts in multilateral negotiations]. Dissertation, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen. Retrieved March 1, 2006, from w210.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/dbt/ volltexte/2005/2026/ First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Broll, W. , Greenhalgh, C. , Churchill, E. (2002). Welcome to CVE 2002. In C. Greenhalgh E. Churchill W. Broll, Eds., Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments. New York: ACM Press. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Croson, R.T.A. (1999). Look at me when you say that: An electronic negotiation simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 30, 23–37. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Daft, R.L. , Lengel, R.H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dennis, A.R. , Kinney, S.T. (1998). Testing media richness theory in the new media: The effects of cues, feedback, and task equivocality. Information System Research, 9, 256–274. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dennis, A.R. , Valacich, J.S. (1999). Rethinking media richness: Toward a theory of media synchronicity. In R. Sprague, (Ed.), Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Diehl, M. , Ziegler, R. (2000). Informationsaustausch und Ideensammlung in Gruppen [Exchanging information and gathering ideas in groups]. In M. Boos K.J. Jonas K. Sassenberg, Eds., Computervermittelte Kommunikation in Organisationen [Computer-mediated communication in organizations] (pp. 89–101). Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Härder, J. (2003). Wissenskommunikation mit Desktop-Videokonferenzsystemen: Strukturierungsangebote für den Wissensaustausch und gemeinsame Inferenzen [Knowledge communication with desktop-videoconferencing systems: Structuring approaches for knowledge exchange and collaborative inferences]. Dissertation, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg. Retrieved March 1, 2006, from: freidok.ub.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/1157/ First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hertel, G. , Geister, S. , Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 69–95. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hollingshead, A.B. , McGrath, J.E. , O’Connor, K.M. (1993). Group task performance and communication technology: A longitudinal study of computer-mediated versus face-to-face work groups. Small Group Research, 24, 307–333. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Loewenstein, J. , Morris, M.W. , Chakravarti, A. , Thompson, L. , Kopelman, S. (2005). At a loss for words: Dominating the conversation and the outcome in negotiation as a function of intricate arguments and communication media. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 28–38. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mannix, E.A. , Thompson, L.L. , Bazerman, M.H. (1989). Negotiation in small groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 508–517. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Maruping, L. , Agarwal, R. (2004). Managing team interpersonal processes through technology: A task-technology fit perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 975–990. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • McGrath, J.E. , & Hollingshead, A.B. (1993). Putting the “group” back in group support systems: Some theoretical issues about dynamic processes in groups with technological enhancements. In L.N. Jessup J.S. Valacich, Eds., Group support systems: New perspectives (pp. 78–96). New York: Macmillan. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Moore, D.A. , Kurtzberg, T.R. , Thompson, L.L. , Morris, M.W. (1999). Long and short routes to success in electronically mediated negotiations: Group affiliations and good vibrations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 22–43. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Morris, M. , Nadler, J. , Kurtzberg, T. , Thompson, L. (2002). Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 89–100. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Naquin, C.E. , Paulson, G.D. (2003). Online bargaining and interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 113–120. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Purdy, J.M. , Nye, P. , Balakrishnan, P.V. (2000). The impact of communication media on negotiation outcomes. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 162–187. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reeves, B. , Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Sallnäs, E.-L. (2005). Effects of communication mode on social presence, virtual presence, and performance in collaborative virtual environments. Presence, 14, 434–449. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schei, V. , Rognes, J.K. (2005). Small group negotiation. When members differ in motivational orientation. Small Group Research, 36, 289–320. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Sheffield, J. (1995). The effect of communication medium on negotiation performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 4, 159–179. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Short, J. , Williams, E. , Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Straus, S.G. , McGrath, J.E. (1994). Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 87–97. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Stuhlmacher, A.F. , & Citera, M. (2005). Hostile behavior and profit in virtual negotiation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 69–93. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sweller, J. , van Merri‰nboer, J.J.G. , & Paas, F.G.W.C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251–296. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Thompson, L. (1990). Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 515–532. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Thompson, L. , Nadler, J. (2002). Negotiation via information technology: Theory and application. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 109–124. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Walther, J.B. , & Burgoon, J.K. (1992). Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 19, 50–88. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar