Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3308532.3329470acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesivaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Assessing Common Errors Students Make When Negotiating

Published: 01 July 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Research has shown that virtual agents can be effective tools for teaching negotiation. Virtual agents provide an opportuni-ty for students to practice their negotiation skills which leads to better outcomes. However, these negotiation training agents often lack the ability to understand the errors students make when negotiating, thus limiting their effectiveness as training tools. In this article, we argue that automated opponent-modeling techniques serve as effective methods for diagnos-ing important negotiation mistakes. To demonstrate this, we analyze a large number of participant traces generated while negotiating with a set of automated opponents. We show that negotiators' performance is closely tied to their understanding of an opponent's preferences. We further show that opponent modeling techniques can diagnose specific errors includ-ing: failure to elicit diagnostic information from an opponent, failure to utilize the information that was elicited, and failure to understand the transparency of an opponent. These results show that opponent modeling techniques can be effective methods for diagnosing and potentially correcting crucial ne-gotiation errors.

References

[1]
National Academies of Sciences, Medicine and others, Promising practices for strengthening the regional STEM workforce development ecosystem, National Academies Press, 2016.
[2]
W. E. Forum, "The future of jobs: Employment, skills and workforce strategy for the fourth industrial revolution," in Global Challenge Insight Report, World Economic Forum, Geneva, 2016.
[3]
E. G. Goldman, "Lipstick and labcoats: Undergraduate women's gender negotiation in STEM fields," NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, vol. 5, pp. 115--140, 2012.
[4]
M. Hernandez and D. R. Avery, "Getting the Short End of the Stick: Racial Bias in Salary Negotiations".
[5]
J. Broekens, M. Harbers, W.-P. Brinkman, C. M. Jonker, K. Van den Bosch and J.-J. Meyer, "Virtual Reality Negotiation Training Increases Negotiation Knowledge and Skill," in Intelligent Virtual Agents: 12th International Conference, IVA 2012, Santa Cruz, CA, USA, September, 12--14, 2012. Proceedings, Y. Nakano, M. Neff, A. Paiva and M. Walker, Eds., Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012, pp. 218--230.
[6]
R. Lin, Y. Oshrat and S. Kraus, "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-Volume 1, 2009.
[7]
S. Monahan, E. Johnson, G. Lucas, J. Finch and J. Gratch, "Autonomous Agent that Provides Automated Feedback Improves Negotiation Skills," in International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 2018.
[8]
A. Rosenfeld, I. Zuckerman, E. Segal-Halevi, O. Drein and S. Kraus, "NegoChat: a chat-based negotiation agent," in Proceedings of the 2014 international conference on Autonomous agents and multi-agent systems, 2014.
[9]
L. L. Thompson, "Information exchange in negotiation," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 27, pp. 161--179, 1991.
[10]
K. Laviers, G. Sukthankar, D. W. Aha, M. Molineaux, C. Darken and others, "Improving Offensive Performance Through Opponent Modeling.," in AIIDE, 2009.
[11]
T. Baarslag, M. Hendrikx, K. Hindriks and C. Jonker, "Predicting the performance of opponent models in automated negotiation," in Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conferences on Web Intelligence (WI) and Intelligent Agent Technologies (IAT)-Volume 02, 2013.
[12]
D. V. Pynadath and S. C. Marsella, "PsychSim: Modeling theory of mind with decision-theoretic agents," in IJCAI, 2005.
[13]
J. Klatt, S. Marsella and N. C. Krämer, "Negotiations in the context of AIDS prevention: an agent-based model using theory of mind," in International Workshop on Intelligent Virtual Agents, 2011.
[14]
C. K. W. De Dreu, S. L. Koole and W. Steinel, "Unfixing the fixed pie: a motivated information-processing approach to integrative negotiation.," Journal of personality and social psychology, vol. 79, p. 975, 2000.
[15]
R. M. Coehoorn and N. R. Jennings, "Learning on opponent's preferences to make effective multi-issue negotiation trade-offs," in Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Electronic commerce, 2004.
[16]
T. Ito, M. Zhang, V. Robu and T. Matsuo, Complex automated negotiations: Theories, models, and software competitions, Springer, 2013.
[17]
Z. Nazari, G. Lucas and J. Gratch, "Fixed-pie Lie in Action," in International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, 2017.
[18]
Z. Nazari, G. M. Lucas and J. Gratch, "Opponent modeling for virtual human negotiators," in International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, 2015.
[19]
J. Mell and J. Gratch, "IAGO: Interactive Arbitration Guide Online," in Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems, 2016.
[20]
J. Mell, J. Gratch, T. Baarslag, R. Aydoran and C. M. Jonker, "Results of the First Annual Human-Agent League of the Automated Negotiating Agents Competition," in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, New York, NY, USA, 2018.
[21]
A. D. Galinsky and T. Mussweiler, "First offers as anchors: the role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus.," Journal of personality and social psychology, vol. 81, p. 657, 2001.
[22]
J. Mell and J. Gratch, "Grumpy & Pinocchio: Answering Human-Agent Negotiation Questions Through Realistic Agent Design," in Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, Richland, 2017.

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)The promise and peril of interactive embodied agents for studying non-verbal communication: a machine learning perspectivePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences10.1098/rstb.2021.0475378:1875Online publication date: 6-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Customizing virtual interpersonal skills training applications may not improve trainee performanceScientific Reports10.1038/s41598-022-27154-213:1Online publication date: 3-Jan-2023
  • (2021)Comparing The Accuracy of Frequentist and Bayesian Models in Human-Agent NegotiationProceedings of the 21st ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents10.1145/3472306.3478354(139-144)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2021
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
IVA '19: Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents
July 2019
282 pages
ISBN:9781450366724
DOI:10.1145/3308532
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

IVA '19
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

IVA '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 15 of 63 submissions, 24%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 53 of 196 submissions, 27%

Upcoming Conference

IVA '24
ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents
September 16 - 19, 2024
GLASGOW , United Kingdom

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)116
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10
Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)The promise and peril of interactive embodied agents for studying non-verbal communication: a machine learning perspectivePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences10.1098/rstb.2021.0475378:1875Online publication date: 6-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Customizing virtual interpersonal skills training applications may not improve trainee performanceScientific Reports10.1038/s41598-022-27154-213:1Online publication date: 3-Jan-2023
  • (2021)Comparing The Accuracy of Frequentist and Bayesian Models in Human-Agent NegotiationProceedings of the 21st ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents10.1145/3472306.3478354(139-144)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2021
  • (2021)Effect of politeness strategies in dialogue on negotiation outcomesProceedings of the 21st ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents10.1145/3472306.3478336(195-202)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2021
  • (2021)The Promise and Peril of Automated NegotiatorsNegotiation Journal10.1111/nejo.1234837:1(13-34)Online publication date: 6-Feb-2021

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media