David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Theory and Decision 53 (4):289-311 (2002)
In economically meaningful interactions negotiations are particularly important because they allow agents to improve their information about the environment and even to change accordingly their own characteristics. In each step of a negotiation an agent has to emit a message. This message conveys information about her preferences and endowments. Given that the information she uses to decide which message to emit comes from beliefs generated in previous stages of the negotiation, she has to cope with the uncertainty associated with them. The assessment of the states of the world also evolves during the negotiation. In this paper we analyze the intertwined dynamics of beliefs and decision, in order to determine conditions on the agents that allow them to reach agreements. The framework for decision making we consider here is based on defeasible evaluation of possibilities: an argument for a choice defeats another one if it is based on a computation that better uses all the available information
|Keywords||negotiation agreements defeasible argumentation|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Behrouz Homayoun Far & Romi Satria Wahono (2003). Cognitive-Decision-Making Issues for Software Agents. Brain and Mind 4 (2):239-252.
E. Bellucci & J. Zeleznikow, Trade-Off Manipulations in the Development of Negotiation Decision Support Systems.
Emilia Bellucci & John Zeleznikow (2005). Developing Negotiation Decision Support Systems That Support Mediators: A Case Study of the Family_winner System. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 13 (2):233-271.
Melvin F. Shakun (1990). Group Decision and Negotiation Support in Evolving, Nonshared Information Contexts. Theory and Decision 28 (3):275-288.
Robert L. Causey (1991). The Epistemic Basis of Defeasible Reasoning. Minds and Machines 1 (4):437-458.
Kevin Gibson (1994). Harmony, Hobbes and Rational Negotiation: A Reply to Dees and Cramton's Promoting Honesty in Negotiation. Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (3):373-381.
Kieran Mathieson (2007). Towards a Design Science of Ethical Decision Support. Journal of Business Ethics 76 (3):269 - 292.
Kevin Gibson (1994). Harmony, Hobbes and Rational Negotiation. Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (3):373-381.
Bruce Edmonds, When and Why Does Haggling Occur? Some Suggestions From a Qualitative but Computational Simulation of Negotiation.
Pieter Dijkstra, Floris Bex, Henry Prakken & Kees Vey Mestdagdeh (2005). Towards a Multi-Agent System for Regulated Information Exchange in Crime Investigations. Artificial Intelligence and Law 13 (1):133-151.
Magnus Boman (1999). Norms in Artificial Decision Making. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (1):17-35.
M. R. Yilmaz (1997). In Defense of a Constructive, Information-Based Approach to Decision Theory. Theory and Decision 43 (1):21-44.
Chris Provis (2004). Negotiation, Persuasion and Argument. Argumentation 18 (1):95-112.
E. Goldberg & K. Podell (1999). Adaptive Versus Veridical Decision Making and the Frontal Lobes. Consciousness and Cognition 8 (3):364-377.
Donald Davidson & Patrick Suppes (1957). Decision Making: An Experimental Approach. Stanford University Press.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads5 ( #237,418 of 1,101,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #306,516 of 1,101,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?