Skip to main content
Log in

Modeling factions for “effects based operations”: part I—leaders and followers

  • Published:
Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

If sociological game theory is not to end up as an artificial exercise, … ,

it is absolutely essential that the beliefs, ideas and experiences

of the actors themselves are moved onto center stage

R. Swedberg 2001, p. 325

Abstract

This paper presents a synthetic approach for generating role playing simulation games intended to support analysts (and trainees) interested in testing alternative competing courses of action (operations) and discovering what effects they are likely to precipitate in potential ethno-political conflict situations. Simulated leaders and followers capable of playing these games are implemented in a cognitive modeling framework, called PMFserv, which covers value systems, personality and cultural factors, emotions, relationships, perception, stress/coping style and decision making. Of direct interest, as Sect. 1.1 explains, is mathematical representation and synthesis of best-of-breed behavioral science models within this framework to reduce dimensionality and to improve the realism and internal validity of the agent implementations. Sections 2 and 3 present this for leader profiling instruments and group membership decision-making, respectively. Section 4 serves as an existence proof that the framework has generated several training and analysis tools, and Sect. 5 concludes with lessons learned. Part II turns to the question of assessment of the synthesis and its usage in course of action studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armstrong JS (2002) Assessing game theory, role playing and unaided judgment. Int J Forecast 18:345–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharathy G (2006). A knowledge engineering based systems methodology for integrating of social science frameworks for modeling agents with cognition, personality and culture. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania

  • Buckley W (1967) Sociology and modern systems theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer C (2003) Behavioral game theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Canella AA, Monroe MJ (1997) Contrasting perspectives on strategic leaders: toward a more realistic view of top managers. J Manag 23(3):213–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemers MM (1997) An integrative theory of leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers P (1998) Complexity and postmodernism: understanding complex systems. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • de Marchi S (2005) Computational and mathematical modeling in the social sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Eidelson RJ, Eidelson JI (2003) Dangerous ideas: five beliefs that propel groups toward conflict. Am Psychol 58:182–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geib C (2004). Assessing the complexity of plan recognition. In: Proceedings of AAAI-2004

  • Green KC (2002) Forecasting decisions in conflict situations: a comparison of game theory, role playing and unaided judgment. Int J Forecast 18:321–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermann MG (1999) Assessing leadership style. Social Science Automation, Hilliard

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer RJ Jr (1999) Psychology of intelligence analysis. Center for the Study of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman AO (1970) Exit, voice, and loyalty. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. www.geert-hofstede.com

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede G (2003) Culture’s consequences, comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • House RJ, Hanges PJ, Javidan M et al. (2004) Culture, leadership, and organizations: the GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Johns M (2006). Deception and trust in complex semi-competitive environments. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania

  • Kaminka GA, Avrahami D (2004). Symbolic behavior-recognition. In: 3rd international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS). NYC, 19–23 July 2004

  • Kautz HA, Allen JF (1986) Generalized plan recognition. In: AAAI 86. AAAI, Mtn View, pp 32–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Kojima H (2004, June). Interview. Game Informer, p 42

  • McDonald D, Lazarus R, Leung A et al (2006) Interoperable human behavior models for simulations. In: 15th conf. on behavioral representation in modeling and simulation (BRIMS). SISO, May 2006

  • Ortony A, Clore GL, Collins A (1988) The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Pew RW, Mavor AS (1998) Modeling human and organizational behavior: application to military simulation. Academic, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman BG (2005). Human performance simulation. In: Ness J, Ritzer D, Tepe V (eds) The science and simulation of human performance (Chap 9). Elsevier, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman BG, Rees R et al. (2005, May) Athena’s prism: a diplomatic strategy role playing game for generating ideas and exploring alternatives. In: Proceedings of international conference on intelligence analysis. Mitre, MacLean

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman BG, Johns M, Cornwell J, O’Brien K (2006a) Human behavior models for agents in simulators and games: part I—enabling science with PMFserv. Presence 15(2):139–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman BG, O’Brien K, Cornwell J (2006b) Human behavior models for agents in simulators and games: part II—gamebot engineering with PMFserv. Presence 15(2):163–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman BG, Bharathy G, Nye B et al (2007). Socio-cultural games for training and analysis. IEEE SMC

  • Simari GI, Parsons S (2004) On approximating the best decision for an autonomous agent. In: 3rd AAMAS conference, W16: workshop on game theory and decision theory, NYC

  • Swedberg R (2001) Sociology and game theory. J Theory Sociol 30(3):301–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien M, Marion R, McKelvey B (in press) Complexity leadership theory: shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Acad. Manag. Rev. (under review)

  • van Lent M, McAlinden R, Brobst P et al (2004) Enhancing the behaviorial fidelity of synthetic entities with human behavior models. In: 13th conference behavior representation in modeling and simulation (BRIMS). SISOstandards.org, Arlington, VI, 12–15 May 2004

  • Watson S, Buede D (1987) Decision synthesis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock S (2002) Game AI: the state of the industry 2001–2002. Game Developer 9(7):31

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barry G. Silverman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silverman, B.G., Bharathy, G., Nye, B. et al. Modeling factions for “effects based operations”: part I—leaders and followers. Comput Math Organiz Theor 13, 379–406 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-007-9017-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-007-9017-8

Keywords

Navigation