IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2006-13-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Reputation: a Mechanism for Flexible Self-Regulation of Multiagent Systems

Author

Abstract

In this paper, we use multiagent technology for social simulation of sociological micro-macro issues in the domain of electronic marketplaces. We argue that allowing self-interested agents to enable social reputation as a mechanism for flexible self-regulation during runtime can improve the robustness and 'social order' of multiagent systems to cope with various perturbations that arise when simulating open markets (e.g. dynamic modifications of task profiles, scaling of agent populations, agent drop-outs, deviant behaviour). Referring to the sociological theory of Pierre Bourdieu, we provide a multi-level concept of reputation that consists of three different types (image, social esteem, and prestige) and considers reputation as a kind of 'symbolic capital'. Reputation is regarded to be objectified as an observable property and to be incorporated into the agents' mental structures through social practices of communication on different aggregation levels of sociality. We present and analyse selected results of our social simulations and discuss the importance of reputation with regard to the robustness of multiagent simulations of electronic markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Hahn & Bettina Fley & Michael Florian & Daniela Spresny & Klaus Fischer, 2007. "Social Reputation: a Mechanism for Flexible Self-Regulation of Multiagent Systems," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 10(1), pages 1-2.
  • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2006-13-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/10/1/2/2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niels Lepperhoff, 2002. "SAM - Simulation of Computer-Mediated Negotiations," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(4), pages 1-2.
    2. Christian Hahn & Bettina Fley & Michael Florian, 2006. "Self-regulation through social institutions: A framework for the design of open agent-based electronic marketplaces," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 181-204, October.
    3. Hayagreeva Rao, 1994. "The Social Construction of Reputation: Certification Contests, Legitimation, and the Survival of Organizations in the American Automobile Industry: 1895–1912," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 29-44, December.
    4. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2003. "The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1407-1424, October.
    5. Ravi Bhavnani, 2003. "Adaptive Agents, Political Institutions and Civic Traditions in Modern Italy," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 6(4), pages 1-1.
    6. Keith Weigelt & Colin Camerer, 1988. "Reputation and corporate strategy: A review of recent theory and applications," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(5), pages 443-454, September.
    7. Kreps, David M. & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Reputation and imperfect information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 253-279, August.
    8. Juliette Rouchier & Martin O'Connor & François Bousquet, 2001. "The Creation of a Reputation in an Artificial Society Organised by a Gift System," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 4(2), pages 1-8.
    9. Cristiano Castelfranchi & Rosaria Conte & Mario Paolucci, 1998. "Normative Reputation and the Costs of Compliance," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 1(3), pages 1-3.
    10. David Hales, 2002. "Group Reputation Supports Beneficent Norms," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(4), pages 1-4.
    11. Dellarocas, Chrysanthos, 2003. "The Digitization of Word-of-mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Working papers 4296-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Paul A. Pavlou & David Gefen, 2004. "Building Effective Online Marketplaces with Institution-Based Trust," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 37-59, March.
    13. Nicole J. Saam & Andreas G. Harrer, 1999. "Simulating Norms, Social Inequality, and Functional Change in Artificial Societies," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 2(1), pages 1-2.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yutaka NAKAI & Masayoshi Muto, 2008. "Emergence and Collapse of Peace with Friend Selection Strategies," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 11(3), pages 1-6.
    2. Riccardo Boero & Giangiacomo Bravo & Marco Castellani & Francesco Laganà & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2009. "Pillars of Trust: An Experimental Study on Reputation and Its Effects," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 14(5), pages 49-67, November.
    3. Karin Hansson & Petter Karlström & Aron Larsson & Harko Verhagen, 2014. "Reputation, inequality and meeting techniques: visualising user hierarchy to support collaboration," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 155-175, June.
    4. Debora E. Vollebregt, 2018. "The Value of Nothing: Reconciling Cultural Capital in Society," Corporate Reputation Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(4), pages 139-152, December.
    5. Buckley, Ralf, 2013. "Social-benefit certification as a game," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 203-209.
    6. Riccardo Boero & Giangiacomo Bravo & Marco Castellani & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2010. "Why Bother with What Others Tell You? An Experimental Data-Driven Agent-Based Model," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 13(3), pages 1-6.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul A. Pavlou & Angelika Dimoka, 2006. "The Nature and Role of Feedback Text Comments in Online Marketplaces: Implications for Trust Building, Price Premiums, and Seller Differentiation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 392-414, December.
    2. Annika Veh & Markus Göbel & Rick Vogel, 2019. "Corporate reputation in management research: a review of the literature and assessment of the concept," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(2), pages 315-353, December.
    3. Tedi Skiti & Xueming Luo & Zhijie Lin, 2022. "When More is Less: Quality and Variety Trade‐off in Sharing Economy Platforms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(7), pages 1817-1838, November.
    4. Anya Samek, 2012. "An Experimental Study of Reputation with Heterogeneous Goods," Artefactual Field Experiments 00439, The Field Experiments Website.
    5. Judy E. Scott & Dawn G. Gregg & Jae Hoon Choi, 2015. "Lemon complaints: When online auctions go sour," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 177-191, February.
    6. Andrew W. Bausch, 2014. "Evolving intergroup cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 369-393, December.
    7. Balázs Kovács, 2024. "The Turing test of online reviews: Can we tell the difference between human-written and GPT-4-written online reviews?," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 651-666, December.
    8. Un-Kon Lee, 2017. "International Tourism Advertisements on Social Media: Impact of Argument Quality and Source," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Gary E Bolton & Claudia Loebbecke & Axel Ockenfels, 2007. "How Social Reputation Networks Interact with Competition in Anonymous Online Trading: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series in Economics 32, University of Cologne, Department of Economics.
    10. Sarah C. Rice, 2012. "Reputation and Uncertainty in Online Markets: An Experimental Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 436-452, June.
    11. Jullien, Bruno & Park, In-Uck, 2019. "Communication, Feedbacks and Repeated Moral Hazard with Short-lived Buyers," TSE Working Papers 19-1027, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Apr 2020.
    12. Heng Tang & Xiaowan Lin, 2019. "Curbing shopping cart abandonment in C2C markets — an uncertainty reduction approach," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(3), pages 533-552, September.
    13. Alp E. Atakan & Mehmet Ekmekci, 2012. "Reputation in Long-Run Relationships," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(2), pages 451-480.
    14. Bruno Jullien & In-Uck Park, 2009. "Seller Reputation and Trust in Pre-Trade Communication," Levine's Working Paper Archive 814577000000000330, David K. Levine.
    15. Chih-Yi, Su & Bou-Wen, Lin, 2021. "Attack and defense in patent-based competition: A new paradigm of strategic decision-making in the era of the fourth industrial revolution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    16. Rajković, Borislav & Đurić, Ivan & Zarić, Vlade & Glauben, Thomas, 2021. "Gaining trust in the digital age: The potential of social media for increasing the competitiveness of small and medium enterprises," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(4).
    17. Fonseca, Miguel A. & Peters, Kim, 2018. "Will any gossip do? Gossip does not need to be perfectly accurate to promote trust," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 253-281.
    18. You, Liangjun & Sikora, Riyaz, 2011. "An adaptive evaluation mechanism for online traders," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(3), pages 739-748, November.
    19. Gary E. Bolton & David J. Kusterer & Johannes Mans, 2015. "Inflated reputations: Uncertainty, leniency & moral wiggle room in trader feedback systems," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 06-04, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences, revised 29 Jul 2016.
    20. Ekmekci, Mehmet, 2011. "Sustainable reputations with rating systems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 479-503, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2006-13-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.