Dr. Hee-Chan Song, a faculty member at Sasin Graduate School of Management at Chulalongkorn University in Thailand, shares his groundbreaking research on understanding conflicts and tensions through the lens of Buddhist philosophy. In this episode, he delves into how language shapes our perceptions, creates divisions, and contributes to conflicts, while offering powerful insights on how silence and mindful reflection can help us rethink and resolve these challenges. The article referenced in the episode:Song, H., (2021) How Do Buddhist Monks Frame Conflicts? A Buddhist Approach to Paradox. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 15(2), 148-165. https://doi.org/10.34891/wy45-9f66

Rees, L. & Tsai, M. & Kopelman, S. & Hu, H., (2024) “Can Confidence Influence Persuasiveness in Disagreements by Conveying Competence versus Dominance? The Moderating Role of Competitiveness”, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 17(2), 153-181. Research has demonstrated that confident individuals gain social influence because their confidence signals competence rather than dominance in settings in which they do not experience a disagreement with others. We extend this research by exploring felt competitiveness, as reflected by perceptions of goal opposition between perceivers and others. In settings where people experience a disagreement, we explore the impact of felt competitiveness on the association between expressed confidence and social perceptions of the expresser’s competence and dominance, and how these shape persuasiveness. We conducted a field study examining dyadic interactions between coworkers (Study 1) and two experiments manipulating competitiveness and confidence (Studies 2-3).Results showed that high competitiveness neutralizes the positive association between expressed confidence and perceived competence, thus eliminating the positive indirect effect of expressed confidence on persuasiveness. Results also demonstrated a stronger positive association between expressed confidence and perceived dominance when competitiveness is higher. However, perceived dominance did not consistently predict persuasiveness, suggesting that the dominance results should be interpreted with caution. Overall, our findings offer novel implications regarding how the social influence processes of confidence expressions are shaped by felt competitiveness.Laura Rees ([email protected]) is an Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior at the College of Business, Oregon State University. Her research focuses on the complexity, nuance, and often counterintuitive nature of emotions and related cognitive and interpersonal experiences and their consequences for decision-making, judgment, perception, persuasion and negotiation, performance, and well-being at work.Dr. Ming-Hong Tsai is an Associate Professor of Psychology in the School of Social Sciences at Singapore Management University. His research focuses on judgment and decision-making, conflict and collaboration, and emotions. He has published papers in journals such as Organization Science, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Journal of Personality, British Journal of Psychology, Journal of Business and Psychology, and Negotiation and Conflict Management Research.

Dr. Kenneth Tai is a faculty member at the Lee Kong Chian School of Business at Singapore Management University. This episode focused on his research on gender and workplace mistreatment. He discussed how men and women receive mistreatment in the workplace. The article referenced in the episode:Tai, K., Lee, K., Kim, E., Johnson, T. D., Wang, W., Duffy, M. K., & Kim, S. (2022). Gender, bottom-line mentality, and workplace mistreatment: The roles of gender norm violation and team gender composition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(5), 854–865. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000936

Dr. Amira Schiff is a professor and the Director of the Conflict Management, Resolution, and Negotiation Graduate Program at Bar-Ilan University. As a researcher in international conflict resolution, she specializes in the intricacies of conflict management and the dynamics of peace processes. Her influential work, particularly the article 'Reaching a Mutual Agreement: Readiness Theory and Coalition Building in the Aceh Peace Process,' earned the prestigious NCMR award for the best paper in 2014. Dr. Schiff has a prolific publication record, contributing to key journals in the field such as NCMR, the International Journal of Conflict Management and the International Negotiation journal. Her book, 'Negotiating Intractable Conflicts: Readiness Theory Revisited,' published by Routledge in 2021, further cements her status as a leading voice in conflict resolution studies.Schiff, A., (2021) “Readiness Theory: A New Approach to Understanding Mediated Prenegotiation and Negotiation Processes Leading to Peace Agreements”, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 14(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.34891/z3t9-9d49

Deborah A. Cai (Ph.D., Michigan State University) is professor and senior associate dean in the Klein College of Media and Communication at Temple University, and she is a faculty member in the Media and Communication doctoral program. Dr. Cai is an international researcher with scholarly and professional expertise in intercultural communication, persuasion, negotiation and conflict management. She has conducted research in China, Japan, and the U.S., and she has trained political and business leaders from Afghanistan, China, Kazakhstan, and developing nations from Asian Pacific Economic Commission (APEC) and the State Department’s leadership program. Deborah is a Fellow in the International Academy of Intercultural Researchers and a Fellow and past president of the International Association for Conflict Management (IACM). She is Past-Chair of the Conflict Management division of the Academy of Management. Deborah served as editor of the journal, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, and is editor of the four-volume collection of research, Intercultural Communication (Sage, Benchmark in Communication). Her research has published in outlets such as Communication Monographs, Communication Research, International Journal of Conflict Management, Human Communication Research, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, as well as The Handbook of Intercultural Communication and the SAGE Handbook of Communication and Conflict.Cai, D. A., (2022) “From Theory to Practice and Back Again: Lessons from Hostage Negotiation for Conflict Management”, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 15(3). doi: https://doi.org/10.34891/20220406-433 

Dr. Hunsaker is a Global Network Assistant Professor of Management and Organizations at the Stern School of Business, New York University.  He has a joint appointment at NYU Shanghai.  His research interests include negotiation, emotion, culture, and subjective value.  He teaches courses on negotiation, conflict management, and organizational behavior and has presented research all over the world.  His greatest achievement—which requires his best negotiation, communication, and organizational skills—is raising a beautiful family of 8 children with his wife and best friend, Melissa.Dr. Teng is Assistant Professor of Management at Penn State Harrisburg. He received his Ph.D. in Business Administration from David Eccles School of Business at the University of Utah. His research examines behavioral ethics & morality, conflict management & negotiation, and social hierarchy in organizations. In 2023 David and Teng received the Best Article award for an article published in 2022.  Congratulations on your scholarly recognition and award-winning article!Getting off to a "Hot" Start: How the Timing of Expressed Anger Influences Relational Outcomes in Negotiation", Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 15(4). doi: https://doi.org/10.34891/2022.0467 

 Tim Stevens is an interdisciplinary scientist with expertise on the role of social media and ICT in social interactions. For his PhD research he studied social media dynamics in agro-food governance: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fview%2Ftimstevensphd%2Fhome&data=05%7C01%7CMichael.Gross%40colostate.edu%7Ced69a171c64a458e552f08db29fb18a6%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C638149930672519013%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=jp8Y0szUNjpPVv4sf8F%2F5%2FXBl14RdJ53r1C0kaPAy5M%3D&reserved=0 He enjoys bringing together disciplines to develop new conceptual and methodological frameworks. He currently investigates the interplay between educational innovations and teacher professional development in higher education.Stevens, T. M. & Aarts, N. & Dewulf, A., (2020) “Using Emotions to Frame Issues and Identities in Conflict: Farmer Movements on Social Media”, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 14(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.34891/9mmd-q341

Philosophers, psychologists, and economists have long asserted that deception harms trust. We challenge this claim. Across four studies, we demonstrate that deception can increase trust. Specifically, prosocial lies increase the willingness to pass money in the trust game, a behavioral measure of benevolence-based trust. In Studies 1a and 1b, we find that altruistic lies increase trust when deception is directly experienced and when it is merely observed. In Study 2, we demonstrate that mutually beneficial lies also increase trust. In Study 3, we disentangle the effects of intentions and deception; intentions are far more important than deception for building benevolence-based trust. In Study 4, we examine how prosocial lies influence integrity-based trust. We introduce a new economic game, the Rely-or-Verify game, to measure integrity-based trust. Prosocial lies increase benevolence-based trust, but harm integrity-based trust. Our findings expand our understanding of deception and deepen our insight into the mechanics of trust.

Emerging evidence suggests that competitiveness and empathy explain men's greater willingness to use unethical tactics in negotiations. We tested whether and how robustly they do with three distinct studies, run with three distinct populations. Simultaneous mediation analyses generally, but not completely, confirmed our expectations. In Study 1, only competitiveness mediated sex differences in unethical negotiation tactics among Chilean business students. Although empathy also explained willingness to use unethical negotiation tactics, the Chilean men and women did not differ in this regard. In Study 2, competitiveness and empathy both mediated sex differences in American business students’ intentions to lie to a client, but competitiveness explained greater variance. In Study 3, both factors explained sex differences in lying to bargaining partners for real stakes by working-age Americans. Our findings suggest that competitiveness and empathy each explain sex differences in willingness to use unethical tactics, but the former does so more consistently.

Emerging evidence suggests that competitiveness and empathy explain men's greater willingness to use unethical tactics in negotiations. We tested whether and how robustly they do with three distinct studies, run with three distinct populations. Simultaneous mediation analyses generally, but not completely, confirmed our expectations. In Study 1, only competitiveness mediated sex differences in unethical negotiation tactics among Chilean business students. Although empathy also explained willingness to use unethical negotiation tactics, the Chilean men and women did not differ in this regard. In Study 2, competitiveness and empathy both mediated sex differences in American business students’ intentions to lie to a client, but competitiveness explained greater variance. In Study 3, both factors explained sex differences in lying to bargaining partners for real stakes by working-age Americans. Our findings suggest that competitiveness and empathy each explain sex differences in willingness to use unethical tactics, but the former does so more consistently.