Aarhus University Seal / Aarhus Universitets segl

Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict? Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict? Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans. / Druckman, Daniel; Adrian, Lin; Damholdt, Malene Flensborg et al.

In: Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 30, No. 2, 04.2021, p. 395-426.

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Druckman, D, Adrian, L, Damholdt, MF, Filzmoser, M, Koszegi, ST, Seibt, J & Vestergaard, C 2021, 'Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict? Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans', Group Decision and Negotiation, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 395-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-020-09716-9

APA

Druckman, D., Adrian, L., Damholdt, M. F., Filzmoser, M., Koszegi, S. T., Seibt, J., & Vestergaard, C. (2021). Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict? Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans. Group Decision and Negotiation, 30(2), 395-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-020-09716-9

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Druckman D, Adrian L, Damholdt MF, Filzmoser M, Koszegi ST, Seibt J et al. Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict? Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans. Group Decision and Negotiation. 2021 Apr;30(2):395-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-020-09716-9

Author

Druckman, Daniel ; Adrian, Lin ; Damholdt, Malene Flensborg et al. / Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict? Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans. In: Group Decision and Negotiation. 2021 ; Vol. 30, No. 2. pp. 395-426.

Bibtex

@article{8b8672a5fb8f4956a32a573dbb890031,
title = "Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict?: Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans",
abstract = "The impacts of various mediation platforms on negotiation outcomes and perceptions are compared in this article. The mediator platforms contrasted were a (teleoperated) Telenoid robot, a human, and a computer screen. All of these platforms used the same script for process diagnosis, analysis, and advice on how to resolve an impasse in a simulated high-tech company de-merger negotiation. A fourth experimental condition consisted of a no-mediation control. More agreements and more integrative agreements were attained by the robotic platform than by the other types of mediator platforms and the control. Mediation via the Telenoid robot also produced more non-structured agreements, which consisted of decisions made outside of the scenario options. Negotiators in this condition had more positive perceptions of the mediation experience, were more satisfied with the outcome, and thought that the mediator{\textquoteright}s advice was more useful. Indirect analyses showed that the outcomes mediated the effects of the conditions on perceived satisfaction. Implications of the findings are discussed in terms of responses to novelty, which include creative and divergent modes of thinking.",
keywords = "Divergent thinking, Electronic mediation, Integrative agreements, Novelty, Representative negotiations, Telenoid robots, CREATIVITY, BEHAVIOR, NEGOTIATION",
author = "Daniel Druckman and Lin Adrian and Damholdt, {Malene Flensborg} and Michael Filzmoser and Koszegi, {Sabine T.} and Johanna Seibt and Christina Vestergaard",
year = "2021",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1007/s10726-020-09716-9",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "395--426",
journal = "Group Decision and Negotiation",
issn = "0926-2644",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Who is Best at Mediating a Social Conflict?

T2 - Comparing Robots, Screens and Humans

AU - Druckman, Daniel

AU - Adrian, Lin

AU - Damholdt, Malene Flensborg

AU - Filzmoser, Michael

AU - Koszegi, Sabine T.

AU - Seibt, Johanna

AU - Vestergaard, Christina

PY - 2021/4

Y1 - 2021/4

N2 - The impacts of various mediation platforms on negotiation outcomes and perceptions are compared in this article. The mediator platforms contrasted were a (teleoperated) Telenoid robot, a human, and a computer screen. All of these platforms used the same script for process diagnosis, analysis, and advice on how to resolve an impasse in a simulated high-tech company de-merger negotiation. A fourth experimental condition consisted of a no-mediation control. More agreements and more integrative agreements were attained by the robotic platform than by the other types of mediator platforms and the control. Mediation via the Telenoid robot also produced more non-structured agreements, which consisted of decisions made outside of the scenario options. Negotiators in this condition had more positive perceptions of the mediation experience, were more satisfied with the outcome, and thought that the mediator’s advice was more useful. Indirect analyses showed that the outcomes mediated the effects of the conditions on perceived satisfaction. Implications of the findings are discussed in terms of responses to novelty, which include creative and divergent modes of thinking.

AB - The impacts of various mediation platforms on negotiation outcomes and perceptions are compared in this article. The mediator platforms contrasted were a (teleoperated) Telenoid robot, a human, and a computer screen. All of these platforms used the same script for process diagnosis, analysis, and advice on how to resolve an impasse in a simulated high-tech company de-merger negotiation. A fourth experimental condition consisted of a no-mediation control. More agreements and more integrative agreements were attained by the robotic platform than by the other types of mediator platforms and the control. Mediation via the Telenoid robot also produced more non-structured agreements, which consisted of decisions made outside of the scenario options. Negotiators in this condition had more positive perceptions of the mediation experience, were more satisfied with the outcome, and thought that the mediator’s advice was more useful. Indirect analyses showed that the outcomes mediated the effects of the conditions on perceived satisfaction. Implications of the findings are discussed in terms of responses to novelty, which include creative and divergent modes of thinking.

KW - Divergent thinking

KW - Electronic mediation

KW - Integrative agreements

KW - Novelty

KW - Representative negotiations

KW - Telenoid robots

KW - CREATIVITY

KW - BEHAVIOR

KW - NEGOTIATION

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096846313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10726-020-09716-9

DO - 10.1007/s10726-020-09716-9

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85096846313

VL - 30

SP - 395

EP - 426

JO - Group Decision and Negotiation

JF - Group Decision and Negotiation

SN - 0926-2644

IS - 2

ER -