When Asking “What” and “How” Helps You Win: Mimicry of Interrogative Terms Facilitates Successful Online Negotiations

Abstract

Strategic word mimicry during negotiations facilitates better outcomes. We explore mimicry of specific word categories and perceptions of rapport, trust, and liking as underlying mechanisms. Dyads took part in an online negotiation exercise in which word mimicry was manipulated: Participants were instructed to mimic each other’s words (both‐mimic), one participant mimicked the other (half‐mimic), or neither participant mimicked (neither‐mimic). When given a simple instruction to mimic their partner, participants mimicked both the style (personal pronouns, adverbs, linguistic style, interrogative terms) and the content (affiliation terms, power terms, and assents) of their partner’s messages. Mimicry was associated with greater joint and individual points gain and perceptions of rapport from the mimicked partner. Further, mimicry of interrogative terms (e.g., how, why) mediated positive effects of mimicry upon negotiation outcomes, suggesting the coordination of question asking between negotiators is an important strategy to create beneficial interactions and add value in negotiations.

‘Rapport myopia’ in investigative interviews: Evidence from linguistic and subjective indicators of rapport

“…Consistent with our findings for perceptions of rapport, we also found that lead interviewers' rapport ratings were weakly related to LSM, our linguistic measure of interpersonal synchrony, whereas the other three parties demonstrated rather stronger agreement between rapport ratings and the degree of LSM. This finding contributes to the growing literature that highlights the informational value of LSM as an objective marker of rapport (Muir, Joinson, Collins, Cotterill, & Dewdney, 2020), adding new evidence that rapport-building occurs at least in part via the coordination of language styles (Richardson et al, 2014). We chose to focus on an objective language measure, but subsequent work could consider the extent to which verbal and non-verbal cues operate together in determining the link between synchrony and rapport-building (Bernieri & Rosenthal, 1991).…”

When Groups of Different Sizes Collide: Effects of Targeted Verbal Aggression on Intragroup Functioning

“…Furthermore, the perspective that verbal mimicry is indicative of positive relational outcomes is supported by field research in various contexts: For example, Meinecke and Kauffeld (2019) showed that verbal mimicry in dyads (leaders and their followers) was associated with the followers’ perception of the leaders’ likeability. On the intragroup level, research found that verbal mimicry of language styles is significantly associated with self-report measures of team cohesion (Castro-Hernandez, Swigger, & Ponce-Flores, 2014; Gonzales et al, 2010; Manson, Bryant, Gervais, & Kline, 2013; Muir, Joinson, Collins, Cotterill, & Dewdney, 2020; Scissors, Gill, & Gergle, 2008; Tausczik & Pennebaker, 2013). In political and negotiation contexts, that is, on the intergroup level, verbal mimicry of language styles during international diplomatic negotiations has been associated with stronger agreement (Bayram & Ta, 2019) and with improved rapport during online negotiations (Muir et al, 2020).…”

“…On the intragroup level, research found that verbal mimicry of language styles is significantly associated with self-report measures of team cohesion (Castro-Hernandez, Swigger, & Ponce-Flores, 2014; Gonzales et al, 2010; Manson, Bryant, Gervais, & Kline, 2013; Muir, Joinson, Collins, Cotterill, & Dewdney, 2020; Scissors, Gill, & Gergle, 2008; Tausczik & Pennebaker, 2013). In political and negotiation contexts, that is, on the intergroup level, verbal mimicry of language styles during international diplomatic negotiations has been associated with stronger agreement (Bayram & Ta, 2019) and with improved rapport during online negotiations (Muir et al, 2020).…”

The chameleon effect in customer relationship management: Experiments on the spillover effects of mimicry in natural settings of a chain hotel and a chain grocery shop

“…In the vein of trust and at the deeper level of interpersonal relationships it was shown that not only personal intimate information is shared as a result of performed mimicry but it seems that rapport is responsible for the all aforementioned effects. To prove this relationship, participants were instructed to either mimic each other’s words, for only one participant to mimic the other, or neither ( Muir et al, 2020 ). Results have shown that mimicry was associated with greater gains (both joint and individual), and a perception of rapport by the mimicked partner.…”

“…Mimicry in both laboratory and natural settings creates trust ( Maddux et al, 2008 ; Swaab et al, 2011 ) and rapport ( Muir et al, 2020 ), it also influences purchasing decisions ( Tanner et al, 2008 ; Jacob et al, 2011 ; Stel et al, 2011a ; Kulesza et al, 2014b , 2017 , 2019 , 2022b ; Christie and Chen, 2018 ) by eliciting susceptibility to the persuasiveness of the mimicker ( Van Swol, 2003 ; Drury and Van Swol, 2005 ). On this grounds, it may be assumed that research on mimicry and its spillover potential has focused mainly on products, and only partially considered the crucial aspect of spreading the benefits of mimicry to the entire company/organization.…”