In Negotiations, If You Feel Your Opponents' Pain, It May Be Their Gain

Crucial in any successful negotiation is an accurate understanding of each side's motivations and needs. And although understanding another's needs involves the talent to empathize, research from the journal Psychological Science reveals that feeling another's emotions can be a deal breaker.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Podcast Transcript: Let's talk about the psychological art of negotiation. 

At root is the concept of the "win–win" strategy, the idea that any deal can be structured in such a way where both parties walk away thinking they profited. 

Crucial for a win–win is access to the other party's motivations, intentions, fears, etcetera. And the talent to know another's perspective is thought of as the ability to empathize—to stand in their shoes and feel what they feel. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


But research published in the April issue of Psychological Science tells a cautionary tale. Researchers found that empathizing with your opponent can wreck the deal. 

152 business students had to negotiate the purchase of an impossibly high-priced gas station. One group was asked to imagine what the seller was thinking, and the other had to get in touch with what the seller was feeling

The scientists found that whereas the empathetic group achieved the highest level of seller satisfaction, the more calculating group secured the greatest number of deals. 

So take heed: get inside the other's head, but don't get so close that you start feeling their pain, lest you appease them to make them happy, then leave the table having lost not only the deal, but emotional energy, too. 

60-Second Psych is a weekly podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe