Interracial negotiations : outcomes and implications

Abstract

White undergraduate students participated in a simulated negotiation where the partner was same-race (i.e., White) or cross-race (i.e., Black) to see whether racial dyad composition and prejudice level or ingroup identification have effects on the negotiation outcomes. The partner (a confederate) responded to the participant using a standardized script. Negotiation outcomes (i.e., joint total, point total) and their relational outcomes (i.e., how much they liked their partner) were compared across conditions. Cross-race negotiations led to lower joint outcomes, and improved relational perceptions, on various measures. Interactions between ingroup identification and race composition were also found. For example, increases in ingroup affect lead to increase in relational outcomes for same-race negotiations but not for cross-race negotiations. Taken together the significant effects suggest cross-race negotiations are significantly more taxing for individuals and this might be particularly true for individuals who are high in ingroup identification. These results suggest the potential for negative implications in the workplace with salary negotiations, training, and conflict resolutions.