Theory on culture and influence in negotiation predicts cultural differences along the lines of informational versus relational persuasion. We review empirical findings that do not offer consistent support for the existing theory. We then uncover a refined four-factor model of persuasion in cross-cultural negotiations. We find that U.S. negotiators endorse interests-based persuasion whereas Japanese negotiators endorse rational persuasion, both of which are forms of informational persuasion. We also find that U.S. negotiators endorse ingratiation whereas Japanese negotiators endorse sanction-based persuasion, both of which are forms of relational persuasion. Consistent with prior cross-cultural research, we also find that the use of culturally-normative strategies assists negotiators in resolving a dispute simulation.