Advertisement

Artificial Intelligence and Law

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 79–107 | Cite as

No smoking here: values, norms and culture in multi-agent systems

  • Francien Dechesne
  • Gennaro Di TostoEmail author
  • Virginia Dignum
  • Frank Dignum
Article

Abstract

We use the example of the introduction of the anti-smoking legislation to model the relationship between the cultural make-up, in terms of values, of societies and the acceptance of and compliance with norms. We present two agent-based simulations and discuss the challenge of modeling sanctions and their relation to values and culture.

Keywords

Norm acceptance Values Culture Multi-agent simulation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the European Complexity-Net (http://www.complexitynet.eu) through the SEMIRA project (http://www.semira.wur.nl) with funding from the Dutch Organization for Scientific Research (NWO).

References

  1. Aldewereld H (2007) Autonomy vs. conformity—an institutional perspective on norms and protocols. Ph.D. thesis, University of UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson K, Banch-Capon T (2009) Co-ordination and co-operation in agent systems: social laws and argumentation. In: Argumentation in multi-agent systems, pp 122–140. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-00207-6_8
  3. Bicchieri C (2006) The grammar of society. Cambridge University Press. http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521573726
  4. Campenní M, Cecconi F, Andrighetto G, Conte R (2010) Norm and social compliance a computational study. Int J Agent Technol Syst (IJATS) 2(1):50–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Conte R, Castelfranchi C, Dignum F (1998) Autonomous norm acceptance. In: Müller JP, Singh MP, Rao AS (eds) ATAL, LNCS, vol 1555. Springer, pp 99–112. http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bibtex/conf/atal/ConteCD98
  6. Dignum F (1999) Autonomous agents with norms. Artif Intell Law 7:69–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dignum F, Dignum V (2009) Emergence and enforcement of social behavior. In: Anderssen RS, Braddock RD, Newham LTH (eds) 18th World IMACS congress and MODSIM09 international congress on modelling and simulation. Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand and International Association for Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, pp 2942–2948. http://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim09/H4/dignum.pdf
  8. Esteva M, Rodrguez-Aguilar JA, Sierra C, Garcia P, Arcos J (2001) On the formal specification of electronic institutions. In: Dignum F, Sierra C (eds) Agent mediated electronic commerce, LNCS, vol 1991. Springer, Berlin, pp 126–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gouveia VV, Ros M (2000) Hofstede and schwartz’s models for classifying individualism at the cultural level. Psicothema 12:25–33Google Scholar
  10. Grossi D (2007) Designing invisible handcuffs-formal investigations in institutions and organizations for multi-agent systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  11. Grossi D, Aldewereld H, Dignum F (2007) Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems II. chap. Ubi Lex, Ibi Poena: designing norm enforcement in E-Institutions. Springer, Berlin, pp 101–114Google Scholar
  12. Hansson SO (2001) The structure of values and norms. Cambridge Studies in Probability, Induction and Decision Theory. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s consequences, comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  14. Hofstede G, Hofstede G (2003) Cultural dimensions. http://www.geert-hofstede.com/
  15. Hofstede G, Hofstede GJ, Minkov M (2010) Cultures and organizations: software for the mind, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. International Tobacco Control Nederland (2009) ITC policy evaluation project- de effecten van de rookvrije horeca op rookgedrag. eerste nameting (2009). Available through http://www.stivoro.nl (in Dutch)
  17. López y López F, Luck M, d’Inverno M (2002) Constraining autonomy through norms. In: AAMAS ’02. ACM, pp 674–681Google Scholar
  18. Miceli M, Castelfranchi C (1989) A cognitive approach to values. J Theory Soc Behav 19:169–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nagelhout GE, Mons U, Allwright S, Guignard R, Beck F, Fong GT, de Vries H, Willemsen MC (2011) Prevalence and predictors of smoking in “smoke-free” bars. findings from the international tobacco control (ITC) Europe surveys. Soc Sci Med 72(10):1643–1651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Repast Organization for Architecture and Development (2003) http://repast.sourceforge.net
  21. Schwartz SH (2006) A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comp Sociol 5(2–3):137–182. doi: 10.1163/156913306778667357 Google Scholar
  22. Scott E (2002) Organizational moral values. Bus Ethics Q 12(1):33–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. van den Hoven M (2005) Design for values and values for design. Information Age+. J Aust Comput Soc 7(2):4–7Google Scholar
  24. van der Weide T (2011) Arguing to motivate decisions. Ph.D. thesis, Utrecht UniversityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francien Dechesne
    • 1
  • Gennaro Di Tosto
    • 2
    Email author
  • Virginia Dignum
    • 1
  • Frank Dignum
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Technology, Policy and ManagementTU DelftDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Information and Computing SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations