Zooming Out on Bargaining Tables: Exploring Which Conversation Dynamics Predict Negotiation Outcomes

How much should you talk, pause, or interrupt your counterpart in negotiations? The present research zooms out on the macrostructure of negotiation conversations to examine how systematic differences in conversation dynamics—the structural and temporal patterns that arise from the presence or absence of speech between interlocutors—relate to objective and relational outcomes at the bargaining table. We examined 38,564 speech turns from 239 online negotiation recordings and derived, for each negotiator (N = 380), 16 measures pertaining to seven dimensions of conversation dynamics: speaking time, turn length, pauses, speech rate, interruptions, backchannels, and response time. Network analyses reveal that many of these measures are interconnected, with clusters of variables suggesting broad differences in negotiators’ propensity to “talk vs. listen” and to mimic their counterparts. Regression and Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) analyses further show that several measures uniquely predict objective and relational outcomes in videoconference negotiations. At the objective level, negotiators who speak more, faster, and with fewer pauses tend to get better deals. At the relational level, negotiators who refrain from interrupting and display more dynamic turn length (i.e., low similarity over successive turns) are better liked. Taken together, the results suggest that conversation dynamics could make or break deals.