View/Open - University of Zululand Institutional Repository

Barry and 01iver (1996:136) also make a point that affect experienced during
negotiation will have an influence on the later tactics and outcomes. Also if the tactics
and experiences change during the negotiation process it will affect what the negotiator
is expecting from the opponent's behaviour and the settlement outcome as well as the
affect itself.
There is an assumption that expectations vary as offers are made and accepted
or rejected, and the affected states also change with them. The question is whether
original or updated expectations are used to project negotiation outcomes. Barry and
Oliver mention only three studies that confirm the use of updated expectations during
negotiation: Szajna and Scannell (1993), Zwick, Pieters, and Baumgartner (1995); and
Ortinau and Bush (1987). In these experiments the subjects were observed at three
different intervals ofa particular period. In the third one the subjects were supplied with
"prior information and actual performance of a mock-up product."(Barry and Oliver
1996:136) The results of all these experiments showed that when the subjects'
performance was poor in the interim their expectations were lowered and when
performance was exceptional the expectations were raised. Also when performance
improved emotional states also improved and when perfonnance worsened emotions
also became negative. However, when the subjects were told to manipulate their moods
through "self-presentation" or "self-control" in order to achieve a certain goal, the
moods did not change according to the outcomes or behaviours ofothers. To Barry and
Oliver this is true in real negotiation where people may present a pleasant appearance
or anger to show resolve. And as negotiation nears settlement the uncertainty is
reduced, thus improving the possibility ofpositive affect.
313