IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v23y2014i3d10.1007_s10726-013-9364-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulated Negotiation Outcomes Through Recommendation Crowding

Author

Listed:
  • Tomasz Szapiro

    (Warsaw School of Economics)

  • Przemysław Szufel

    (Warsaw School of Economics)

Abstract

The goal of the paper is to propose a method for finding outcomes of negotiations of multiple parties with a multi-criteria decision outcomes evaluation. Firstly, the procedure for reduction of continuous set of options to large but finite crowd of compromise recommendations is presented. Next, the crowd is integrated to a single benchmark which is treated as a proposal of artificial auxiliary player called a lone wolf as presented by Kersten and Szapiro (Proceedings of the international conference of the society of systems and science. Budapest, 1987). The strategy of negotiation with this artificial player is proposed to generate a benchmark evaluations scheme for real negotiation. Finally, a multi-agent simulation approach for multi-lateral negotiation process modeling is presented in order to estimate possible negotiation outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomasz Szapiro & Przemysław Szufel, 2014. "Simulated Negotiation Outcomes Through Recommendation Crowding," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 443-461, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:23:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-013-9364-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-013-9364-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-013-9364-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-013-9364-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerald W. Evans, 1984. "An Overview of Techniques for Solving Multiobjective Mathematical Programs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(11), pages 1268-1282, November.
    2. Wojtek Michalowski & Tomek Szapiro, 1992. "A Bi-Reference Procedure for Interactive Multiple Criteria Programming," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 247-258, April.
    3. Kersten, Gregory E. & Szapiro, Tomasz, 1986. "Generalized approach to modeling negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 142-149, July.
    4. Reilly, Robert J, 1982. "Preference Reversal: Further Evidence and Some Suggested Modifications in Experimental Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 576-584, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kaliszewski, Ignacy & Michalowski, Wojtek, 1999. "Searching for psychologically stable solutions of multiple criteria decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(3), pages 549-562, November.
    2. Roszkowska, Ewa & Wachowicz, Tomasz, 2015. "Application of fuzzy TOPSIS to scoring the negotiation offers in ill-structured negotiation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 920-932.
    3. Daniel P. Loucks & László Somlyódy, 1986. "Multiobjective Assessment of Multipurpose Water Resources Projects for Developing Countries," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 10(1), pages 61-75, February.
    4. Aouni, Belaid & Kettani, Ossama, 2001. "Goal programming model: A glorious history and a promising future," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 225-231, January.
    5. H. P. Benson & E. Sun, 2000. "Outcome Space Partition of the Weight Set in Multiobjective Linear Programming," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 105(1), pages 17-36, April.
    6. Nowak, Maciej, 2007. "Aspiration level approach in stochastic MCDM problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1626-1640, March.
    7. Kalu, Timothy Ch. U., 1999. "Capital budgeting under uncertainty: An extended goal programming approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 235-251, January.
    8. Tadeusz Trzaskalik, 2023. "Vectors of indicators and pointer function in the Multistage Bipolar Method," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 31(3), pages 791-816, September.
    9. Koronakos, Gregory & Sotiros, Dimitris & Despotis, Dimitris K. & Kritikos, Manolis N., 2022. "Fair efficiency decomposition in network DEA: A compromise programming approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    10. Piotr Wojewnik & Tomasz Szapiro, 2010. "Bireference Procedure fBIP for Interactive Multicriteria Optimization with Fuzzy Coefficients," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, vol. 2(3), pages 169-193, June.
    11. Sebastian Neumann-Böhme & Stefan A. Lipman & Werner B. F. Brouwer & Arthur E. Attema, 2021. "Trust me; I know what I am doing investigating the effect of choice list elicitation and domain-relevant training on preference reversals in decision making for others," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(5), pages 679-697, July.
    12. Bruno S. Frey & Reiner Eichenberger, 1989. "Should Social Scientists Care about Choice Anomalies?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 1(1), pages 101-122, July.
    13. Yasemin Aksoy, 1990. "An interactive branch‐and‐bound algorithm for bicriterion nonconvex/mixed integer programming," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 403-417, June.
    14. Wan S. Shin & Diane Breivik Allen, 1994. "An interactive paired comparison method for bicriterion integer programming," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 423-434, April.
    15. Di Martinelly, Christine & Meskens, Nadine, 2017. "A bi-objective integrated approach to building surgical teams and nurse schedule rosters to maximise surgical team affinities and minimise nurses' idle time," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 323-334.
    16. Gregory B. Pollock & Keith A. Lewis, 1993. "Gambling in a Malthusian Universe," Rationality and Society, , vol. 5(1), pages 85-106, January.
    17. Harrison, Glenn W, 1994. "Expected Utility Theory and the Experimentalists," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 223-253.
    18. Marc Willinger, 1990. "La rénovation des fondements de l'utilité et du risque," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 41(1), pages 5-48.
    19. I. Kaliszewski & W. Michalowski, 1998. "Establishing Regret Attitude of a Decision Maker within the MCDM Modeling Framework," Working Papers ir98070, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    20. Jean C. Bedard & Babu R. Gopi & B. Vijayalakshmi, 1991. "A multiple criteria model for audit planning decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 293-308, September.

    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:spr:grdene:v:23:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-013-9364-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.