3730 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Jeremy Yip is an Assistant Professor of Management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.
His research program explores the psychology of conflict and negotiations. His first stream of research explores the consequences of emotions. In particular, his research demonstrates that anger influences unethical behavior, perspective-taking, negotiation impasses, and decision-making. His work also considers the consequences of anxiety and gratitude, and the role of individual differences in emotional intelligence.
A second stream of his research explores competition. In this stream, his work introduces a new conceptualization of competitive communication called trash-talking. His research shows that trash-talking is commonly encountered in organizations. His findings reveal that trash-talking triggers perceptions of rivalry and boosts effort-based performance. However, trash-talking can have destructive consequences such as increasing unethical behavior or diminishing creativity.
His research has been published in leading journals such as Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, Psychological Science, and Social Psychological & Personality Science.
He earned his Ph.D. in organizational behavior from the University of Toronto and a postdoctoral fellowship in psychology at Yale University. Prior to joining the McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University in 2017, he was a Lecturer & Research Scholar at the Wharton School where he conducted research and taught three sections of the Wharton Negotiations course.
Jeremy Yip’s research investigates the nature and consequences of conflict and negotiations.
Specifically, his research investigates emotions, trash-talking and ethics.
For Jeremy Yip’s latest research, you can visit www.jeremyyip.org
Julia Minson, Eric VanEpps, Jeremy Yip, Maurice Schweitzer (2018), Eliciting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth: The effect of question type on deception, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 147, pp. 76-93.
Jeremy Yip, Daniel Stein, Stéphane Côté, Dana Carney (2018), Follow your gut? Emotional intelligence moderates the association between physiologically measured somatic markers and risk-taking, Emotion, Forthcoming.
Abstract: Emotional Intelligence (EI) is a set of adaptive abilities that pertain to emotions and emotional information. Prior research suggests that lower EI individuals behave maladaptively in social situations compared to higher EI individuals. However, there is a paucity of research on whether EI promotes adaptive decision-making. Leveraging the somatic marker hypothesis (SMH), we explore whether EI moderates the relationship between skin conductance responses (SCRs) and risky decision-making. In a multi-visit assessment over two weeks, participants (N = 52) completed tests of emotional intelligence and made a total of 5,145 decisions. At Time 1, participants completed an ability test of EI and cognitive intelligence. At Time 2, participants completed 100 decision trials of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). Consistent with prior research using the IGT, participants played a computerized card game with real monetary rewards in which two “safe” decks led to higher average monetary rewards and two “risky” decks to higher average losses. We found that EI moderates the relationship between physiological arousal (SCR) and risk-taking such that lower EI individuals exhibited a maladaptive, positive association between SCRs and risk-taking, whereas higher EI individuals did not exhibit a relationship between SCRs and risk-taking. Our findings suggest one important way in which lower EI may lead to maladaptive decision-making is through appraising physiological arousal incorrectly.
Jeremy Yip, Maurice Schweitzer, Samir Nurmohamed (2018), Trash-Talking: Competitive Incivility Motivates Rivalry, Performance, and Unethical Behavior, Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes.
Abstract: Trash-talking increases the psychological stakes of competition and motivates targets to outperform their opponents. In Studies 1 and 2, participants in a competition who were targets of trash-talking outperformed participants who faced the same economic incentives, but were not targets of trash-talking. Perceptions of rivalry mediate the relationship between trash-talking and effort-based performance. In Study 3, we find that targets of trash-talking were particularly motivated to punish their opponents and see them lose. In Study 4, we identify a boundary condition, and show that trash-talking increases effort in competitive interactions, but incivility decreases effort in cooperative interactions. In Study 5, we find that targets of trash-talking were more likely to cheat in a competition than were participants who received neutral messages. In Study 6, we demonstrate that trash-talking harms performance when the performance task involves creativity. Taken together, our findings reveal that trash-talking is a common workplace behavior that can foster rivalry and motivate both constructive and destructive behavior.
Jeremy Yip, Kelly Lee, Cindy Chan, Alison Wood Brooks (Under Review), Thanks for nothing: Expressing gratitude invites exploitation by competitors.
Jeremy Yip and Martin Schweinsberg (2017), Infuriating impasses: Angry expressions promote exiting behavior in negotiations, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8 (6), pp. 706-714.
Abstract: Prior research has focused on the influence of emotional expressions on the value of negotiated outcomes. Across three studies, we demonstrate that people interacting with angry counterparts become more likely to walk away from a negotiation, resulting in an impasse. In Study 1, participants who encountered counterparts expressing anger were more likely to choose an impasse, relative to those with neutral counterparts. In Study 2, building on the emotion-as-social-information (EASI) model, we found that inferences of selfishness mediate the effect of angry expressions on impasses. In Study 3, we found that timing moderates the relationship between angry expressions and impasses. Furthermore, we demonstrated that perceptions of inappropriateness mediate the interactive effect of timing and angry expressions on impasses. Taken together, our work reveals that expressing anger is risky in negotiations because people infer that angry counterparts are selfish, and become more likely to exit negotiations.
Jeremy Yip and Maurice Schweitzer (2016), Mad and misleading: Incidental anger promotes deception, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 137, pp. 207-217.
Abstract: Emotions influence ethical behavior. Across four studies, we demonstrate that incidental anger, anger triggered by an unrelated situation, promotes the use of deception. In Study 1, participants who felt incidental anger were more likely to deceive their counterpart than those who felt neutral emotion. In Study 2, we demonstrate that empathy mediates the relationship between anger and deception. In Study 3, we contrast anger with another negative-valence emotion, sadness. We find that participants who felt incidental anger were more likely to use deception than were participants who felt incidental sadness or neutral emotion. In Study 4, we show that incentives moderate the relationship between anger and deception. Collectively, our work reveals that incidental anger promotes unethical behavior because angry people become less empathetic when pursuing their self-interest.
Jeremy Yip and Maurice Schweitzer (2015), Trust promotes unethical behavior: Excessive trust, opportunistic exploitation, and strategic exploitation, Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, pp. 216-220.
Abstract: Trust is critical for our cooperation and effective working relationships, but trust also enables exploitation and unethical behavior. Prior trust research has disproportionately focused on the benefits of trust, even though some of the most egregious unethical behaviors occur because of misplaced trust. Targets of exploitation misplace their trust, because they rely on the wrong cues and are exploited by people who either opportunistically or strategically take advantage of their trust. We call for future work to explore the critical link between trust and unethical behavior.
Jeremy Yip and Stéphane Côté (2013), The emotionally intelligent decision-maker: Emotion understanding ability reduces the effect of incidental anxiety on risk-taking, Psychological Science, 24 (1), pp. 48-55.
Abstract: In two experiments, we examined how a core dimension of emotional intelligence, emotion-understanding ability, facilitates decision making. Individuals with higher levels of emotion-understanding ability can correctly identify which events caused their emotions and, in particular, whether their emotions stem from events that are unrelated to current decisions. We predicted that incidental feelings of anxiety, which are unrelated to current decisions, would reduce risk taking more strongly among individuals with lower rather than higher levels of emotion-understanding ability. The results of Experiment 1 confirmed this prediction. In Experiment 2, the effect of incidental anxiety on risk taking among participants with lower emotion-understanding ability, relative to participants with higher emotion-understanding ability, was eliminated when we informed participants about the source of their anxiety. This finding reveals that emotion-understanding ability guards against the biasing effects of incidental anxiety by helping individuals determine that such anxiety is irrelevant to current decisions.
S. Stein, P. Papadogiannis, Jeremy Yip, G. Sitarenios (2009), Emotional intelligence of leaders: a profile of top executives, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30, pp. 87-101.
Jeremy Yip teaches three sections of the OIDD291 Negotiations course each academic year at the Wharton School. This course meets 2 times per week and there are 16 weeks in the semester.
This course number is currently used for several course types including independent studies, experimental courses and Management & Technology Freshman Seminar. Instructor permission required to enroll in any independent study. Wharton Undergraduate students must also receive approval from the Undergraduate Division to register for independent studies. Section 002 is the Management and Technology Freshman Seminar; instruction permission is not required for this section and is only open to M&T students. For Fall 2020, Section 004 is a new course titled AI, Business, and Society. The course provides a overview of AI and its role in business transformation. The purpose of this course is to improve understanding of AI, discuss the many ways in which AI is being used in the industry, and provide a strategic framework for how to bring AI to the center of digital transformation efforts. In terms of AI overview, we will go over a brief technical overview for students who are not actively immersed in AI (topic covered include Big Data, data warehousing, data-mining, different forms of machine learning, etc). In terms of business applications, we will consider applications of AI in media, Finance, retail, and other industries. Finally, we will consider how AI can be used as a source of competitive advantage. We will conclude with a discussion of ethical challenges and a governance framework for AI. No prior technical background is assumed but some interest in (and exposure to) technology is helpful. Every effort is made to build most of the lectures from the basics.
The way a question is phrased can determine whether one gets the truth or a deceitful answer, according to Wharton's Maurice Schweitzer.…Read MoreKnowledge at Wharton - 7/27/2018