In this study we investigated the influence of social motives and communication channel on multiparty negotiation outcomes under dictator decision making rule. First, as effects of social motives are widely established, we predicted that pro social motivation would increase joint outcomes and pro-self motivation would decrease joint outcomes. Secondly, we expected social motives to interact with communication channel. Since powerholders display more value claiming behaviors and experience less social responsibility (both common in pro-social negotiators), we specifically expected pro-self groups, to obtain suboptimal outcomes in the online condition. We tested our hypotheses using a three-party negotiation game where power asymmetry was manipulated. Results supported our hypotheses: First, the robust effect of social motives on joint outcomes was successfully replicated. Secondly, communication channel interacted with social motives, leading pro-self groups to underperform and – unexpectedly- pro-social groups to do even better in online conditions. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.
