Skip to main content

A Non-intrusive Approach to Measuring Trust in Opponents in a Negotiation Scenario

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10791))

Abstract

There is a consensus that trust in one’ opponent plays a significant role in promoting parties to engage in the conflict management process. Trust is an important yet complex and little-understood relation among parties in conflict. In general, trust can be seen as a measure of confidence that an entity or entities will behave expectedly. Without trust, the instruments to prevent or manage the conflict, such as negotiation, are handicapped and cannot reach their full potential for promoting an end to or a mitigation of a conflict. Hence, our motivation to examine trust is three-fold. First, the present study aims to address and expand on this line of research by investigating the possibility of measuring trust based on quantifiable behavior. To do so, we provide a brief review of the existing definitions of trust and define trust in the context of a negotiation scenario. Further, we propose a formal definition so that the analysis of trust in this kind of scenarios can be developed. Thus, it is suggested the use of Ambient Intelligence techniques that use a trust data model to collect and evaluate relevant information based on the assumption that observable trust between two entities (parties) results in certain typical behaviors. Third, this work aims to study the particular connection between relational aspects of trust and parties’ conflict styles based on two dimensions: cooperativeness and assertiveness. The main contribution of this work is the identification of situations in which trust relationships influences the negotiation performance. To do so, an experiment was set-up in which we tried to streamline all the relevant aspects of the interaction between the parties and its environment that occur in a sensory rich environment, to measure trust. To simulate a conflict situation, a web-based game was developed. It was designed to enable test participants to engage in a conflict experience induced by the presence of Ambient Intelligence systems. Several tests were performed. We then engaged in rigorous assessment, post- processing and analysis of results. We validated the results comparing them with trust measures obtained through the use of a questionnaire (carefully adapted) from social networks.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Fells, R.E.: Developing trust in negotiation. Empl. Relat. 15(1), 33–45 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R.: Trust is much more than subjective probability: mental components and sources of trust. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Washington, DC, USA, HICSS 2000, vol. 6, p. 6008. IEEE Computer Society (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kappmeier, M.: Its all about trust how to assess the trust relationship between conflict parties. In Proceedings of the IACM 24th Annual Conference Paper (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zeleznikow, J.: Comparing the Israel–Palestinian Dispute to Australian Family Mediation. Group Decis. Negot. 23(6), 1301–1317 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Picard, R.W.: Computer learning of subjectivity. ACM Comput. Surv. 27(4), 621–623 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Deutsch, M.: The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes. Carl Hovland Memorial Lectures. Yale University Press, New Haven (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Robbins, S.P.: Organizational Behavior. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lodder, A.R., Zeleznikow, J.: Enhanced Dispute Resolution Through the Use of Information Technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Carneiro, D., Gomes, M., Novais, P., Neves, J.: Developing dynamic conflict resolution models based on the interpretation of personal conflict styles. In: Antunes, L., Pinto, H.S. (eds.) EPIA 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7026, pp. 44–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24769-9_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Sherchan, W., Nepal, S., Paris, C.: A survey of trust in social networks. ACM Comput. Surv. 45(4), 47:1–47:33 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ebner, N.: Online dispute resolution and interpersonal trust. In: ODR: Theory and Practice (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Adali, S., et al.: Measuring behavioral trust in social networks. In: 2010 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI), pp. 150–152, May 2010

    Google Scholar 

  13. Naquin, C.E., Paulson, G.D.: Online bargaining and interpersonal trust. J. Appl. Psychol. 88(1), 113–120 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Marsa-Maestre, I., Klein, M., Jonker, C.M., Aydoan, R.: From problems to protocols: towards a negotiation handbook. Decis. Support Syst. 60, 39–54 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gomes, M., Oliveira, T., Carneiro, D., Novais, P., Neves, J.: Studying the effects of stress on negotiation behavior. Cybern. Syst. 45(3), 279–291 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Carneiro, D., Novais, P., Andrade, F., Zeleznikow, J., Neves, J.: Online dispute resolution: an artificial intelligence perspective. Artif. Intell. Rev. 41(2), 211–240 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lewicki, R., Brinsfield, C.: Measuring trust beliefs and behaviours. In: Lyon, F., Möllering, G., Saunders, M. (eds.) Handbook of Research Methods on Trust, p. 29. Edward Elgar Pub. (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lewicki, R.J., Polin, B.: Trust and negotiation. In: Handbook of Research on Negotiation, chap. 7, p. 161 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Malhotra, D., Murnighan, J.K.: The effects of contracts on interpersonal trust. Adm. Sci. Q. 47(3), 534–559 (2002). 9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ebner, Noam, Zeleznikow, John: Fairness, trust and security in online dispute resolution. Hamline Univ. Sch. Law’s J. Public Law Policy 36(2), (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Han, G., Harms, P.D.: Team identification, trust and conflict: a mediation model. Int. J. Confl. Manag. 21(1), 20–43 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by COMPETE: POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007043 and FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) within the Project Scope UID/CEC/00319/2013.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Gomes .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Gomes, M., Zeleznikow, J., Novais, P. (2018). A Non-intrusive Approach to Measuring Trust in Opponents in a Negotiation Scenario. In: Pagallo, U., Palmirani, M., Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Villata, S. (eds) AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems. AICOL AICOL AICOL AICOL AICOL 2015 2016 2016 2017 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10791. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00178-0_36

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00178-0_36

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-00177-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-00178-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics