Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Toward a Unified Negotiation Framework: Leveraging Strengths in Behavioral and Computational Communities

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Models for Intercultural Collaboration and Negotiation

Part of the book series: Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation ((AGDN,volume 6))

Abstract

While there has been a large body of negotiation literature in both Behavioral Science (behavioral) and Artificial Intelligence/Game Theory (computational) communities, there has not been an attempt to bridge the two communities to our best knowledge. In this chapter, we compare and contrast the characteristics of behavioral and computational literature in negotiation. We propose that incorporating the strengths of two types of literature are valuable in expanding the horizon of research outlook.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, C., & Shirako, A. (2008). Are individuals reputations related to their history of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 320–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bac, M., & Raff, H. (1996). Note: Issue-by-issue negotiations: The role of information and time preference. Games and Economic Behavior, 13, 125–134.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B., & Oliver, L. (1996). Affect in dyadic negotiation: A model and propositions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 127–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balakrishnan, P. V., & Eliashberg, J. (1995). An analytical process model of two-party negotiation. JehoshuaManagement Science, 41(2), 226–243.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bensaid, B., & Gary-Bobo, R. J. (1996). An exact formula for the lion’s share: A model for preplay negotiation. Games and Economic Behavior, 14, 44–148.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, G. E., Chatterjee, K., & McGinn, K. L. (2003). How communication links influence coalition bargaining: A laboratory investigation. Management Science, 49(5), 583–598.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, P., Brzostowski, J., Kersten G., Kim, J. B., Kowalczyk, R., Strecker, S., et al. (2006). e-Negotiation systems and software agents: Methods, models and applications. In Intelligent decision-making support systems (pp. 271–300). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Busch, L-A., & Horstmann, I. J. (2002). The game of negotiations: Ordering issues and implementing agreements. Games and Economic Behavior, 41, 169–191.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Curhan, J. R., Elfenbein, H., & Xu, H. (2006). What do people value when they negotiate? Mapping the domain of subjective value in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 493–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Drue, C., Weingart, L., & Kwon, S. (2000). Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: A meta-analytic review and test of two theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 889–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of competition and cooperation. Human Relations, 2, 199–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, D. (1986). Stages, turning points and crises: Negotiating military base rights, Spain and the United States. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30, 327–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faratin, P., Sierra, C., & Jennings, N. R. (2002). Using similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs in automated negotiations. Artificial Intelligence, 142, 205–237.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fatima, S. S., Woodldridge, M., & Jennings, N. R. (2004). An agenda-based framework for multi-issue negotiation. Artificial Intelligence, 152, 1–45.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Forgas, J. (1998). On feeling good and getting your way: Mood effects on negotiator cognition and bargaining strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 129–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanaki, N., Peterhansl, A., Dodds, P. S., & Watts, D. J. (2007). Cooperation in evolving social networks. Management Science, 53(7), 1036–1050.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kersten, G. E., Michalowski, W., Szpakowicz, S., & Koperczak, Z. (1991). Restructurable representations of negotiations. Management Science, 37(10), 1269–1290.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, S. (1997). Negotiation and cooperation in multi-agent environments. Artificial Intelligence, 94, 79–97.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, S., Wilkenfeld, J., & Zlotkin, G. (1995). Multiagent negotiation under time constraints. Artificial Intelligence, 75, 297–345.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, S., Sycara, K., & Evanchik. (1998). Argumentation in negotiation: A formal model and implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 104(1–2), 1–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, S., Hoz-Weiss, P., Wilkenfeld, J., Andersen, D. R., & Pate, A. (2008). Resolving crises through automated bilateral negotiations. Artificial Intelligence, 172, 1–18.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, R. (1997). The role of affect in negotiations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 33, 84–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, G., & Sycara, K. (2008). A generic framework for automated multi-attribute negotiation, group decision and negotiation. doi:10.1007/s10726-008-9119-9, ISSN 0926-2644 (Print) 1572-9907 (Online).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, G., Li, C., Sycara, K., & Giampapa, J. (2004). Literature review on multi-attribute negotiations. Technical report. Pittsburgh, PA: Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, G., Li, C., & Sycara, K. (2006). Efficient multi-attribute negotiation with incomplete information. The Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation, 15(5), 511–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, G., Sycara, K., & Li, C. (2008). A decentralized model for automated multi-attribute negotiations with incomplete information and general utility functions. Journal of Multi Agent and Grid Systems, 4(1), 39–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, A., & Vogt, C. (2003). Cooperation in international environments due to a preference for equity. Journal of Public Economics, 87, 2049–2067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laruelle, A., & Valenciano, F. (2009). Cooperative bargaining foundations of the Shaply-Shubik index. Games and Economic Behavior, 65, 242–255.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Li, C., Giampapa, J., Sycara, K. (2006). Bilateral contract negotiation decisions with uncertain dynamic outside options, IEEE systems, man and cybernetics, part C. Special Issue on Game Theoretic Analysis and Stochastic Simulation of Negotiation Agents, 36(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, R., Kraus, S., Wilkenfeld, J., & Barry, J. (2008). Negotiating with bounded rational agents in environments with incomplete information using an automated agent. Artificial Intelligence, 172, 823–851.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 426–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., Jennings, N. R., Shadbolt, N., Leung, H., & Lee, J. H. (2003). A fuzzy constraint based model for bilateral, multi-issue negotiations in semi-competitive environments. Artificial Intelligence, 148, 53–102.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • McGinn, K., & Keros, A. (2002). Improvisation and the logic of exchange in socially embedded transactions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 442–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myerson, R. B. (1977). Two-person bargaining problems and comparable utility. Econometrica, 45, 1631–1637.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nash, J. (1953). Two-person cooperative games. Econometrica, 21, 128–140.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolo, A., & Yu, Y. (2008). Strategic divide and choose. Games and Economic Behavior, 64, 268–289.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, B., Samet, D., Wiener, Z., & Winter, E. (2004). Bargaining with an agenda. Games and Economic Behavior, 48, 139–153.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D., & Rubin, J. (1986). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiations. Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramchurn, S. D., Sierra, C., Godo, L., & Jennings, N. R. (2007). Negotiation using rewards. Artificial Intelligence, 171, 805–837.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rangaswamy, A., & Shell, G. R. (1997). Using computers to realize joint gains in negotiations: Toward an “electronic bargaining table”. Management Science, 43(8) 1147–1163.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. G., & Shakun, M. F. (1974). A normative model for negotiation. Management Science, 20(10), 1364–1375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sebenius, J. K. (1992). Negotiation analysis: A characterization and review. Management Science, 38(1), 18–38.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sycara, K. (1990). Persuasive argumentation in negotiation. Theory and Decision, 28(3), 203–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sycara, K. P. (1991). Problem restructuring in negotiation. Management Science, 37(10), 1248–1268.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Synder, C., & Higgins, R. (1988). Excuses their effective roles in the negotiation of reality. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 23–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. (1998). The mind and heart of the negotiator. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C., & Manstead, A. (2003). The interpersonal effects of anger and happiness on negotiation behavior and outcomes. IACM 15th annual conference. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange, P. A. (1999). The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 337–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng, D., & Sycara, K. (1998). Bayesian learning in negotiation. International Journal of Human-Computers Studies, 48(1), 125–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zlotkin, G., & Jeffrey, S. (1996). Rosenschein. Compromise in negotiation: Exploring worth functions over states. Artificial Intelligence, 84, 151–176.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the ARO Multi University Research Initiative grant W911-NF-0810301.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Nazli Turan, Tinglong Dai & Laurie Weingart

  2. Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Katia Sycara

Authors
  1. Nazli Turan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tinglong Dai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katia Sycara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Laurie Weingart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katia Sycara .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

    Katia Sycara

  2. Dept. Psychology, University of Maryland Dept. Psychology, College Park, Maryland, USA

    Michele Gelfand

  3. Behavioral & Social Sciences, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral & Social Sciences, Arlington, Virgin Islands, USA

    Allison Abbe

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Turan, N., Dai, T., Sycara, K., Weingart, L. (2013). Toward a Unified Negotiation Framework: Leveraging Strengths in Behavioral and Computational Communities. In: Sycara, K., Gelfand, M., Abbe, A. (eds) Models for Intercultural Collaboration and Negotiation. Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5574-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5574-1_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5573-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5574-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation