Abstract
In this study we aim to observe if intentions are conveyed by a relevant conversational context in a chatbot interface and if it influences decision-making. We created two conditions using the alternate counter-offer version of the ultimatum game in 2 negotiation settings: face-to-face and through a chatbot. There are two inter-locutors: the proposer and the respondent. The proposer must share 10 units with the respondent. If the respondent accepts the units are shared while everyone loses if the respondent refuses. 92 participants took part in this study: 62 in the chat-bot condition and 30 in the face-to-face condition. Participants faced three player profiles: stochastic, selfish, and rational. Results show that participants decrease the value of the offer more easily in the chatbot condition with the selfish profile. We conclude that the intentions are correctly conveyed by the profiles even in a chatbot-like negotiation despite the absence of non-verbal behaviors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., Schwarze, B.: An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 3, 367–388 (1982)
Tisserand, J.-C.: Le jeu de l’ultimatum, une méta-analyse de 30 années de recherches expérimentales. L’actualité Économique 92, 289–314 (2016)
Blount, S.: When social outcomes aren’t fair: the effect of causal attributions on preferences. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 63(2), 131–144 (1995)
Rabin, M.: Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. Am. Econ. Rev. 83, 1281–1302 (1993)
Sonnemans, J., Schram, A., Offerman, T.: Strategic behavior in public good games: when partners drift apart. Econ. Lett. 62, 35–41 (1999)
Falk, A., Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U.: Testing theories of fairness—intentions matter. Games Econ. Behav. 62, 287–303 (2008)
Dufwenberg, M., Kirchsteiger, G.: Reciprocity and wage undercutting. Eur. Econ. Rev. 44, 1069–1078 (2000)
Sperber, D., Wilson, D.: Relevance: Communication and Cognition, 2nd edn. Blackwell, Oxford (1995)
Marchetti, A., Castelli, I., Harlé, K.M., Sanfey, A.G.: Expectations and outcome: the role of proposer features in the ultimatum game. J. Econ. Psychol. 32, 446–449 (2011)
Forgas, J.P.: On feeling good and getting your way: mood effects on negotiator cognition and bargaining strategies. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 565–577 (1998)
Petit, E.: Émotions et prise de décision dans le jeu de l’ultimatum. Les cahiers internationaux de psychologie sociale 3, 71–90 (2009)
Von Bertalanffy, L., Chabrol, J.B., László, E., Paulre, B.: Théorie générale des systèmes. Dunod (1973)
Grice, H.P.: Logic and conversation. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J.L. (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Arts, pp. 41–58. Academic Press, New-York (1975)
Jacquet, B., Baratgin, J., Jamet, F.: Cooperation in online conversations: the response times as a window into the cognition of language processing. Front. Psychol. 10, 727 (2019)
Jacquet, B., Hullin, A., Baratgin, J., Jamet, F.: The impact of the gricean maxims of quality, quantity and manner in chatbots. In: International Conference on Information and Digital Technologies (IDT), pp. 180–189. IEEE (2019)
Jacquet, B., Baratgin, J., Jamet, F.: The gricean maxims of quantity and of relation in the turing test. In: 11th International Conference on Human System Interaction (HSI), pp. 332–338. IEEE Press (2018)
Jacquet, B., Jamet, F., Baratgin, J.: On the pragmatics of the turing test. In: International Conference on Information and Digital Technologies (IDT-2021). IEEE Press (in Press)
Jacquet, B., Jaraud, C., Jamet, F., Guéraud, S., Baratgin, J.: Contextual information helps understand messages written with textisms. Appl. Sci. 11(11), 4853 (2021)
Pillutla, M.M., Murnighan, J.K.: Unfairness, anger, and spite: emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 68, 208–224 (1996)
Schanke, S., Burtch, G., Ray, G.: Estimating the impact of “humanizing” customer service chatbots. Inf. Syst. Res., 1–17 (2021)
Jacquet, B., Masson, O., Jamet, F., Baratgin, J.: On the lack of pragmatic processing in artificial conversational agents. In: Ahram, T., Karwowski, W., Taiar, R. (eds.) Human Systems Engineering and Design. IHSED 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 876, pp. 394–399. Springer, Cham (2018)
Jacquet, B., Baratgin, J.: Mind-reading chatbots: we are not there yet. In: Ahram, T., Taiar, R., Langlois, K., Choplin, A. (eds.) Human Interaction, Emergin Technologies and Future Applications III. IHIET 2020. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 1253, pp. 266–271. Springer, Cham (2020)
Jacquet, B., Baratgin, J.: Towards a pragmatic model of an artificial conversational partner: opening the blackbox. In: Świątek, J., Borzemski, L., Wilimowska, Z. (eds.) Information Systems Architecture and Technology: Proceedings of 40th Anniversary International Conference on Information Systems Architecture and Technology. ISAT 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 1051, pp. 169–178. Springer, Cham (2019)
Data Availability
All data and transcripts are found at https://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JVMS2.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Beaunay, B., Jacquet, B., Baratgin, J. (2022). A Selfish Chatbot Still Does not Win in the Ultimatum Game. In: Ahram, T., Taiar, R. (eds) Human Interaction, Emerging Technologies and Future Systems V. IHIET 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 319. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85540-6_33
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85540-6_33
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-85539-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-85540-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)