Fixed-pie Lie in Action

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10498)

Abstract

Negotiation is a crucial skill for socially intelligent agents. Sometimes negotiators lie to gain advantage. In particular, they can claim that they want the same thing as their opponents (i.e., use a “fixed-pie lie”) to gain an advantage while appearing fair. The current work is the first attempt to examine effectiveness of this strategy when used by agents against humans in realistic negotiation settings. Using the IAGO platform, we show that the exploitative agent indeed wins more points while appearing fair and honest to its opponent. In a second study, we investigated how far the exploitative agents could push for more gain and examined their effect on people’s behavior. This study shows that even though exploitative agents gained high value in short-term, their long-term success remains questioned as they left their opponents unhappy and unsatisfied.

Keywords

Human-agent negotiation Behavioral game theory Deception 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baarslag, T., Kaisers, M., Gerding, E.H., Jonker, C.M., Gratch, J.: When will negotiation agents be able to represent us the challenges and opportunities for autonomous negotiators. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lin, R., Oshrat, Y., Kraus, S.: Investigating the benefits of automated negotiations in enhancing people’s negotiation skills. In: Proceedings of The 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, vol. 1, pp. 345–352 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Core, M., Traum, D., Lane, H.C., Swartout, W., Gratch, J., van Lent, M., Marsella, S.: Teaching negotiation skills through practice and reflection with virtual humans. Simulation 82(11), 685–701 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Broekens, J., Harbers, M., Brinkman, W.-P., Jonker, C.M., Van den Bosch, K., Meyer, J.-J.: Virtual reality negotiation training increases negotiation knowledge and skill. In: Nakano, Y., Neff, M., Paiva, A., Walker, M. (eds.) IVA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7502, pp. 218–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33197-8_23 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gratch, J., DeVault, D., Lucas, G.M., Marsella, S.: Negotiation as a challenge problem for virtual humans. In: Brinkman, W.-P., Broekens, J., Heylen, D. (eds.) IVA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9238, pp. 201–215. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21996-7_21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Osborne, M.J., Rubinstein, A.: A course in game theory. MIT Press (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jennings, N.R., Faratin, P., Lomuscio, A.R., Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M.J., Sierra, C.: Automated negotiation: prospects, methods and challenges. Gr. Decis. Negot. 10(2), 199–215 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thompson, L.L.: Information exchange in negotiation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 27(2), 161–179 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gratch, J., Nazari, Z., Johnson, E.: The misrepresentation game: how to win at negotiation while seeming like a nice guy. In: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems, pp. 728–737 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mell, J., Gratch, J.: IAGO: interactive arbitration guide online. In: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems, pp. 1510–1512 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nazari, Z., Lucas, G.M., Gratch, J.: Opponent modeling for virtual human negotiators. In: Brinkman, W.-P., Broekens, J., Heylen, D. (eds.) IVA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9238, pp. 39–49. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21996-7_4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baarslag, T., Hendrikx, M., Hindriks, K., Jonker, C.: Predicting the performance of opponent models in automated negotiation. In: Proc. - 2013 IEEE/WIC/ACM Int. Conf. Intell. Agent Technol. IAT 2013, vol. 2, pp. 59–66 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gratch, J., Nguyen, T.: Misrepresentation Negotiation Games. Univ. South. Calif. Inst. Creat. Technol. Play, Vista (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reilly, P.R.: Was Machiavelli right? Lying in negotiation and the art of defensive self-help (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Creative TechnologiesUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations