The Effect of Decision Satisfaction Prediction in Argumentation-Based Negotiation

  • João CarneiroEmail author
  • Diogo Martinho
  • Goreti Marreiros
  • Paulo Novais
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 616)


Supporting group decision-making is a complex process, especially when decision-makers have no opportunity to gather at the same place and at the same time. Besides that, finding solutions may be difficult in case representing agents are not able to understand the process and support the decision-maker accordingly. Here we propose a model and an algorithm that will allow the agent to analyse tendencies. This way we intend that agents can achieve decisions with more quality and with higher levels of consensus. Our model allows the agent to redefine his objectives to maximize both his and group satisfaction. Our model proved that agents that use it will obtain higher average levels of consensus and satisfaction. Besides that, agents using this model will obtain those higher levels of consensus and satisfaction in most of the times compared to agents that do not use it.


Group decision support systems Argumentation Decision satisfaction Automatic negotiation Multi-Agent systems 



This work has been supported by COMPETE Programme (operational programme for competitiveness) within project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007043, by National Funds through the FCT– Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) within the Projects UID/CEC/00319/2013, UID/EEA/00760/2013, and the João Carneiro PhD grant with the reference SFRH/BD/89697/2012 and by Project MANTIS - Cyber Physical System Based Proactive Collaborative Maintenance (ECSEL JU Grant nr. 662189).


  1. 1.
    Luthans, F.: Organizational Behavior. McGraw-Hill, Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    DeSanctis, G., Gallupe, B.: Group decision support systems: a new frontier. ACM SIGMIS Database 16, 3–10 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Desanctis, G., Gallupe, R.B.: A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Manage. Sci. 33, 589–609 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grudin, J.: Group dynamics and ubiquitous computing. Commun. ACM 45, 74–78 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marreiros, G., Santos, R., Ramos, C., Neves, J.: Context-aware emotion-based model for group decision making. IEEE Intell. Syst. 25, 31–39 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carneiro, J., Santos, R., Marreiros, G., Novais, P.: UbiGDSS: a theoretical model to predict decision-makers’ satisfaction. Int. J. Multimed. Ubiquit. Eng. 10, 191–200 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kwon, O., Yoo, K., Suh, E.: UbiDSS: a proactive intelligent decision support system as an expert system deploying ubiquitous computing technologies. Expert Syst. Appl. 28, 149–161 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shim, J.P., Warkentin, M., Courtney, J.F., Power, D.J., Sharda, R., Carlsson, C.: Past, present, and future of decision support technology. Decis. Support Syst. 33, 111–126 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Paul, S., Seetharaman, P., Ramamurthy, K.: User satisfaction with system, decision process, and outcome in GDSS based meeting: an experimental investigation. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2004)-Track 1, vol. 1, pp. 10037–10032. IEEE Computer Society (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carneiro, J., Marreiros, G., Novais, P.: Using satisfaction analysis to predict decision quality. Int. J. Artif. Intell.™ 13, 45–57 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Muller, J., Hunter, A.: An argumentation-based approach for decision making. In: 2012 IEEE 24th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), pp. 564–571. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marey, O., Bentahar, J., Khosrowshahi-Asl, E., Sultan, K., Dssouli, R.: Decision making under subjective uncertainty in argumentation-based agent negotiation. J. Ambient Intell. Humanized Comput. 6, 307–323 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dennis, A.R.: Information exchange and use in small group decision making. Small Group Res. 27, 532–550 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hill, G.W.: Group versus individual performance: are N + 1 heads better than one? Psychol. Bull. 91, 517 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Higgins, E.T.: Making a good decision: value from fit. Am. Psychol. 55, 1217 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schimmack, U., Oishi, S., Furr, R.M., Funder, D.C.: Personality and life satisfaction: a facet-level analysis. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 30, 1062–1075 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Judge, T.A., Heller, D., Mount, M.K.: Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: a meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 87, 530 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ramchurn, S.D., Jennings, N.R., Sierra, C.: Persuasive negotiation for autonomous agents: a rhetorical approach (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ito, T., Shintani, T.: Persuasion among agents: an approach to implementing a group decision support system based on multi-agent negotiation. In: International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 592–599. Citeseer (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kraus, S., Sycara, K., Evenchik, A.: Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation. Artif. Intell. 104, 1–69 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martinho, D., Carneiro, J., Marreiros, G., Novais, P.: Dealing with Agents’ Behaviour in the Decision-Making Process. In: SOOW (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • João Carneiro
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Diogo Martinho
    • 1
  • Goreti Marreiros
    • 1
  • Paulo Novais
    • 2
  1. 1.GECAD – Knowledge Engineering and Decision Support GroupInstitute of Engineering – Polytechnic of PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.ALGORITMI CentreUniversity of MinhoBragaPortugal

Personalised recommendations