Concession crossover in electronic negotiations

• Autorzy: Carbonneau Real , Vahidov Rustam , Yu Bo
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Negotiation is a joint decision making process involving making concessions by the parties. Concession-making may involve giving up negotiator’s utility and is an essential activity in the negotiation process. In the past it has been suggested by some authors that negotiators utility functions over the issues may not be linear. In this case, a phenomenon called “concession crossover” takes place, in which a negotiator may switch issues on which they choose to make concessions at some point in negotiations. This work sets to investigate the validity of such claims. To this end we introduce several concession-making models and use them for testing hypotheses. We have used a dataset from online negotiation experiments featuring a contract-signing case. The results support the claim that concession crossover does indeed occur.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

electronic negotiations; concession making; concession crossover

• Wydawca: Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Czasopismo: Control and Cybernetics
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: Vol. 50, No. 1
• Strony: 51--67
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 24 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Carbonneau Real

• Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

autor

Vahidov Rustam

• Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

autor

Yu Bo

• Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Bibliografia

• Carbonneau, R., Kersten, G.E. and Vahidov, R. (2008) Predicting opponent’s moves in electronic negotiations using neural networks. Expert Systems with Applications 34, 1266-1273.
• Carbonneau, R., Kersten, G. and Vahidov, R. (2011) Pairwise issue modeling for negotiation counteroffer prediction using neural networks. Decision Support Systems 50, 449-459.
• Carbonneau, R.A., Vahidov, R. and Kersten, G.E. (2014) Quantitative Concession Behavior Analysis and Prediction for Decision Support in Electronic Negotiations. International Journal of Decision Support System Technology (IJDSST) 6, 16-30.
• Filzmoser, M. and Vetschera, R. (2008) A Classification of Bargaining Steps and their Impact on Negotiation Outcomes. Group Decision and Negotiation 17, 421.
• Gossen, H.H. (1983) The Laws of Human Relations and the Rules of Human Action Derived Therefrom. MIT Press.
• Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 263-291.
• Kersten, G. and Lai, H. (2010) Electronic Negotiations: Foundations, Systems, and Processes. In: D. M. Kilgour and C. Eden (eds.), Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation, 4, 361-392. Springer Netherlands.
• Kersten, G.E. and Noronha, S.J. (1999) WWW-based negotiation support: design, implementation, and use. Decision Support Systems 25, 135-154.
• Kersten, G.E., Roszkowska, E. and Wachowicz, T. (2015) Do the negotiators’ profiles influence an accuracy in defining the negotiation offer scoring systems? In: 15th International Conference on Group Decision & Negotiation. Warsaw School of Economics Press.
• Kersten, G., Roszkowska, E. and Wachowicz, T. (2016) An Impact of Negotiation Profiles on the Accuracy of Negotiation Offer Scoring Systems-Experimental Study. Multiple Criteria Decision Making 11, 77.
• Kersten, G.E., Vahidov, R. and Gimon, D. (2013) Concession-making in multi-attribute auctions and multi-bilateral negotiations: Theory and experiments. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 12, 166-180.
• Layard, R., Mayraz, G. and Nickell, S. (2008) The marginal utility of income. Journal of Public Economics 92, 1846-1857.
• Moran, S. and Ritov, I. (2002) Initial perceptions in negotiations: evaluation and response to ‘logrolling’ offers. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 15, 101-124.
• Mumpower, J.L. (1991) The Judgment Policies of Negotiators and the Structure of Negotiation Problems. Management Science 37, 1304-1324.
• Ng, Y.K. (1997) A case for happiness, cardinalism, and interpersonal comparability. The Economic Journal 107, 1848-1858.
• Northcraft, G.B., Brodt, S.E. and Neale, M.A. (1995) Negotiating with nonlinear subjective utilities: Why some concessions are more equal than others. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 63, 298-310.
• Northcraft, G.B., Preston, J.N., Neale, M.A., Kim, P.H. and Thomas-Hunt, M.C. (1998) Non-linear preference functions and negotiated outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 73, 54-75.
• Pruitt, D.G. (1981) Negotiation Behavior. Academic Press.
• Roszkowska, E. and Wachowicz, T. (2015) Inaccuracy in defining preferences by the electronic negotiation system users. In: International Conference on Group Decision and Negotiation. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, 218. 131-143. Springer.
• Schoop, M., Jertila, A. and List, T. (2003) Negoisst: a negotiation support system for electronic business-to-business negotiations in e-commerce. Data & Knowledge Engineering 47, 371-401.
• Stigler, G.J. (1950) The Development of Utility Theory. I. Journal of Political Economy 58, 307-327.
• Tajima, M. and Fraser, N.M. (2001) Logrolling Procedure for Multi-Issue Negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation 10, 217-235.
• Veenhoven, R. (1991) Is Happiness Relative? Social Indicators Research 24, 1-34.
• Yuan, Y. (2003) Online negotiation in electronic commerce. International Journal of Management Theory and Practices 4, 39-48.