Advertisement

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

  • Nazli Turan
  • Tinglong Dai
  • Katia Sycara
  • Laurie Weingart
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation book series (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.

Keywords

Behavioral research Computational approaches Automated negotiation Utilities Subjective characteristics Emotion Agent reasoning Negotiation literature Interdisciplinary study Game theory 

Notes

Acknowledgements

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

References

  1. Anderson, C., & Shirako, A. (2008). Are individuals reputations related to their history of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 320–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bac, M., & Raff, H. (1996). Note: Issue-by-issue negotiations: The role of information and time preference. Games and Economic Behavior, 13, 125–134.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barry, B., & Oliver, L. (1996). Affect in dyadic negotiation: A model and propositions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balakrishnan, P. V., & Eliashberg, J. (1995). An analytical process model of two-party negotiation. JehoshuaManagement Science, 41(2), 226–243.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Bolton, G. E., Chatterjee, K., & McGinn, K. L. (2003). How communication links influence coalition bargaining: A laboratory investigation. Management Science, 49(5), 583–598.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Busch, L-A., & Horstmann, I. J. (2002). The game of negotiations: Ordering issues and implementing agreements. Games and Economic Behavior, 41, 169–191.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of competition and cooperation. Human Relations, 2, 199–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Faratin, P., Sierra, C., & Jennings, N. R. (2002). Using similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs in automated negotiations. Artificial Intelligence, 142, 205–237.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Fatima, S. S., Woodldridge, M., & Jennings, N. R. (2004). An agenda-based framework for multi-issue negotiation. Artificial Intelligence, 152, 1–45.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 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
  17. Hanaki, N., Peterhansl, A., Dodds, P. S., & Watts, D. J. (2007). Cooperation in evolving social networks. Management Science, 53(7), 1036–1050.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Kersten, G. E., Michalowski, W., Szpakowicz, S., & Koperczak, Z. (1991). Restructurable representations of negotiations. Management Science, 37(10), 1269–1290.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Kraus, S. (1997). Negotiation and cooperation in multi-agent environments. Artificial Intelligence, 94, 79–97.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Kraus, S., Wilkenfeld, J., & Zlotkin, G. (1995). Multiagent negotiation under time constraints. Artificial Intelligence, 75, 297–345.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. Kraus, S., Sycara, K., & Evanchik. (1998). Argumentation in negotiation: A formal model and implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 104(1–2), 1–69.Google Scholar
  22. Kraus, S., Hoz-Weiss, P., Wilkenfeld, J., Andersen, D. R., & Pate, A. (2008). Resolving crises through automated bilateral negotiations. Artificial Intelligence, 172, 1–18.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Kumar, R. (1997). The role of affect in negotiations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 33, 84–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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
  25. 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
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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
  28. Lange, A., & Vogt, C. (2003). Cooperation in international environments due to a preference for equity. Journal of Public Economics, 87, 2049–2067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Laruelle, A., & Valenciano, F. (2009). Cooperative bargaining foundations of the Shaply-Shubik index. Games and Economic Behavior, 65, 242–255.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 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
  31. 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.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. Loewenstein, G., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 426–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. McGinn, K., & Keros, A. (2002). Improvisation and the logic of exchange in socially embedded transactions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 442–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Myerson, R. B. (1977). Two-person bargaining problems and comparable utility. Econometrica, 45, 1631–1637.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. Nash, J. (1953). Two-person cooperative games. Econometrica, 21, 128–140.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. Nicolo, A., & Yu, Y. (2008). Strategic divide and choose. Games and Economic Behavior, 64, 268–289.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Neill, B., Samet, D., Wiener, Z., & Winter, E. (2004). Bargaining with an agenda. Games and Economic Behavior, 48, 139–153.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  39. Pruitt, D., & Rubin, J. (1986). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  40. Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiations. Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Ramchurn, S. D., Sierra, C., Godo, L., & Jennings, N. R. (2007). Negotiation using rewards. Artificial Intelligence, 171, 805–837.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  42. 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.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Rao, A. G., & Shakun, M. F. (1974). A normative model for negotiation. Management Science, 20(10), 1364–1375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sebenius, J. K. (1992). Negotiation analysis: A characterization and review. Management Science, 38(1), 18–38.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Sycara, K. (1990). Persuasive argumentation in negotiation. Theory and Decision, 28(3), 203–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sycara, K. P. (1991). Problem restructuring in negotiation. Management Science, 37(10), 1248–1268.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. Synder, C., & Higgins, R. (1988). Excuses their effective roles in the negotiation of reality. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thompson, L. (1998). The mind and heart of the negotiator. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  49. 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
  50. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zeng, D., & Sycara, K. (1998). Bayesian learning in negotiation. International Journal of Human-Computers Studies, 48(1), 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zlotkin, G., & Jeffrey, S. (1996). Rosenschein. Compromise in negotiation: Exploring worth functions over states. Artificial Intelligence, 84, 151–176.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nazli Turan
    • 1
  • Tinglong Dai
    • 1
  • Katia Sycara
    • 2
  • Laurie Weingart
    • 1
  1. 1.Tepper School of BusinessCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Robotics InstituteCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations