On Personal and Role Mental Attitudes: A Preliminary Dependence-Based Analysis

  • Jaime Simão Sichman
  • Rosaria Conte
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1515)


In this paper, we present some preliminary results concerning the extension of dependence theory [2] and social reasoning [9] to cope with the notion of organizational roles. In order to accomplish this task, we first present a rather informal definition of organization and roles, showing how this additional dimension can be represented within a 3-layered architecture of mental states. We then restrict our analysis to the domain level, by extending our original notions of unilateral and bilateral dependence, as well as that of goal situation, to show that just by representing explicitly the input source of some mental attitudes one can easily explain some interesting social phenomena, like agents’ adequacy to roles and vice-versa. For methodological reasons, we divide this analysis along two main axes, i.e., the inter-agent and the intra-agent dimensions.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cardozo, E.: DPSK: A Kernel for Distributed Problem Solving. Phd Thesis, CAED, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PE (January 1987)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Castelfranchi, C., Micelli, M., Cesta, A.: Dependence relations among autonomous agents. In: Werner, E., Demazeau, Y. (eds.) Decentralized A. I. 3, pp. 215–227. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V, Amsterdam (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Conte, R., Castelfranchi, C.: Norms as mental objects: From normative beliefs to normative goals. In: Ghedira, K., Sprumont, F. (eds.) Pre-proceedings of the 5th European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, Neuchâtel, Switzerland (August 1993)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gasser, L.: Boundaries, identity and aggregation: Plurality issues in multiagent systems. In: Werner, E., Demazeau, Y. (eds.) Decentralized A. I. 3, pp. 199–212. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V, Amsterdam (1992)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huberman, B.A., Hogg, T.: Communities of practice: Performance and evolution. Technical report, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Minsky, N.H., Rozenshtein, D.: Controllable delegation: An exercise in law-governed systems. In: Meyrowitz, N. (ed.) Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications, New Orleans, LA, October 1989, pp. 371–380 (1989); SIGPLAN Notices 24(10) (October 1989)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: BDI agents: From theory to practice. In: Lesser, V. (ed.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on MultiAgent Systems, San Francisco, USA, pp. 312–319. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rosenschein, J.S., Zlotkin, G.: Rules of Encounter: Designing Conven- tions for Automated Negotiation among Computers. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sichman, J.S.: Du Raisonnement Social Chez les Agents: Une Approche Fondée sur la Théorie de la Dépendance. Thèse de Doctorat, Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Simon, H.A.: Models of Man. Wiley, New York (1957)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: Towards a theory of cooperative problem solving. In: Demazeau, Y., Müller, J.-P., Perram, J. (eds.) Pre-proceedings of the 6th European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, Odense, Denmark, August 1994, pp. 15–26 (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yu, E.S.K.: Modelling organizations for information systems requirements engineering. In: IEEE Computer Society Press (ed.) Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, San Diego, CA, January 1993, pp. 34–41 (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaime Simão Sichman
    • 1
  • Rosaria Conte
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Engineering Department, Intelligent Techniques LaboratoryUniversity of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Italian National Research CouncilInstitute of Psychology, Division of AI, Cognitive Modelling and InteractionRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations