Abstract
This paper reports the results of two studies that examined the impact of framing negotiations in affective terms. Pursuant to the recommendations made by Clyman and Tripp (2000) for reducing risks associated with discrepant values, the objective of the first study was to determine the optimal way of representing potential outcomes in affective terms in a negotiation payoff table. Results demonstrated the superiority of happy and unhappy face icons over other representations; it also revealed a slight advantage to varying the quantity of icons, rather than size, to reflect differences in the relative values of these outcomes. In the second study, the focus was on determining to what extent, if any, framing negotiations in affective terms would differentially affect negotiators' thoughts and feelings prior to engaging in a two‐party negotiation. Results indicated that when negotiations are affectively framed, negotiators report higher levels of negotiation involvement and positive emotion and lower levels of trust, as well as a decreased likelihood of employing cooperative negotiation tactics. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.