Purpose – (1) To study the impact of verifiable information on the multi-bilateral negotiations and their outcomes. (2) To explain the reasons for the sellers’ lower satisfaction despite achieving better results in verifiable vs. non-verifiable multi-bilateral negotiations. Design/methodology/approach – We propose an experimental approach, in which groups of students participate in multi-bilateral negotiations. Collected process data and data obtained from two questionnaires is used to compare non-verifiable and verifiable multi-bilateral negotiations. Originality/value –This is, arguably, the first study on the role of information in multi-bilateral multi-attribute negotiations. It shows that social-psychological aspects affect the process and that new information may increase the impact of these aspects on the results. Practical implications – While more experiments need to be conducted the results of these experiments are applicable to market exchanges and transactions which involve government and business organizations. Multi-bilateral negotiations are more flexible than auctions and they allow for the consideration of multiple attributes in a dynamic way. This is one of the reason for using them instead of multi-attribute auctions. The social-psychological aspects and the role of information needs to be carefully considered. The results from our experiments suggest that in business negotiations disclosure of verifiable information may have unintended consequences. These results should be verified in other experiment and field studies both in commercial and non-commercial contexts.