Extending dual-process theory to negotiation contexts, this study aims to examine how using a foreign versus native language influences negotiators’ self-efficacy, strategy use and negotiation outcomes.
The authors used one face-to-face negotiation and two experimental scenarios studies (n = 650) with German and French dual-language speakers. Analyses included both individual-level and dyadic modeling (actor-partner interdependence models) to examine intra- and interpersonal processes.
Across studies, negotiators reported higher self-efficacy in their native language but achieved better joint outcomes in their foreign language. Lower self-efficacy in the foreign language condition predicted superior joint outcomes, greater insight into counterpart priorities and increased use of cooperative strategies (problem-solving and compromising) by both actors and partners. Mediation analyses supported that foreign language use improved joint outcomes via enhanced insight.
Findings are based on controlled simulations; future work should examine high-stakes, real-world negotiations and other language combinations.
Training negotiators to strategically use foreign languages can enhance perspective-taking and analytical engagement, promoting cooperation, mutual gains and more equitable agreements in multilingual and diverse workplace settings.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no prior research has jointly examined self-efficacy and negotiation outcomes while distinguishing between native and foreign language use. This study addresses that gap by isolating the psychological effects of language, holding culture constant and applying dual-process theory to explain how foreign versus native language use shapes self-efficacy, cognitive processing and negotiation behavior.
