Alina Pommeranz
Joost Broekens
Willem-Paul Brinkman
ABSTRACT
Motivation -- Elicitation of preferences is crucial in negotiation support. This is a non-trivial task which could be supported by computers.
Research approach -- Experiment in which 32 participants have to order holidays using different preference elicitation techniques including a navigational task and affective scoring. The results were used as input for a lexicographic ordering algorithm.
Findings/design -- Traditional property rating approach seems most preferred by the participants and resulted in one of the best orderings of the outcomes space to match their preferences, at least when using the lexicographic algorithm.
Originality/value -- The elicitation process is approached from an algorithmic perspective as well as from a user-centred perspective for both navigation and affective attitude.
Take away message -- A multi-angle approach gives a richer understanding of the process of preference elicitation.
- Barry, B., and Oliver, R. L. (1996). Affect in Dyadic Negotiation: A Model and Propositions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 67 (2): 127--143.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Boutilier, C. (2002). A POMDP Formulation of Preference Elicitation Problems. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 239--246, Edmonton. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Broekens, D. J. AffectButton: Towards a Standard for Dynamic Affective User Feedback. Submitted (2008).Google Scholar
- Buelens, M., Van De Woestyne, M., Mestdagh, S., Bouckenooghe, D. (2008). Methodological Issues in Negotiation Research: A State-of-the-Art-Review, Groep Decis Negot, 17:321--345Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chen, L., and Pu, P. (2004). Survey of Preference Elicitation Methods. Technical Report IC/200467, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL).Google Scholar
- Dastani, M., Jacobs, N., Jonker, C. M. and Treur, J. (2001). Modeling User Preferences and Mediating Agents in Electronic Commerce. In: F. Dignum, C. Sierra (eds.), Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes. Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol.6. Kluwer Academic Publisher.Google Scholar
- De Dreu, C., Carnevale, P. (2005). Disparate methods and common findings in the study of negotiation. Int Negot 10:193--203Google ScholarCross Ref
- Desmet, P. (2002). Designing Emotions. Doctoral dissertation, Delft University of Technology, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- Druckman, D., (2005). Doing research: methods of inquiry for conflict analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
- Guo, Y., Müller, J. P. and Weinhardt, C. (2003). Learning User Preferences for Multi-attribute Negotiation: An Evolutionary Approach. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
- Hopmann, P. (2002) Negotiating data: reflections on the qualitative and quantitative analysis of negotiation processes. Int Negot 7(1):67--85Google ScholarCross Ref
- Isomursu, M., Tahti, M., Vainamo, S., and Kuutti, K. (2007). Experimental evaluation of five methods for collecting emotions in field settings with mobile applications. Int. Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65(4): 404--418. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Liu, F. (2008). Changing for the Better: Preference Dynamics and Agent Diversity. PhD Thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
- Mehrabian, A. (1980). Basic Dimensions for a General Psychological Theory. OG&H Publisher.Google Scholar
- Moore, D., Murnighan JK (1999). Alternative models of the future of negotiation research. Negot J., 15(4):347--353Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pu, P., Faltings, B., and Torrens, M. (2003). User-involved Preference Elicitation. IJCAI Workshop on Configuration.Google Scholar
- Rashid, A. M., Albert, I., Cosley, D., Lam, S. K., McNee, S., Konstan, J. A., and Riedl, J. (2002). Getting to know you: Learning new user preferences in recommender systems. In Proc. of the 2002 Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review 110(1): 145--172.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sánchez, J. A., Hernández, N. P, Penagos, J. C., and Ostróvskaya, Y. Conveying Mood and Emotion in Instant Messaging by Using a Two-Dimensional Model for Affective States. In: Anais do IHC 2006, ACM Press (2008), 66--72. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shearin, S. and Liebermann, H. (2001) Intelligent Profiling by example. In Proceedings of the Conference of Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI'01), ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Swearingen, K. and Sinha, R. (2001). Beyond Algorithms: An HCI Perspective on Recommender Systems. ACM SIGIR 2001 Workshop on Recommender SystemsGoogle Scholar
Index Terms
- Multi-angle view on preference elicitation for negotiation support systems
Recommendations
Decision support for preference elicitation in multi-attribute electronic procurement auctions through an agent-based intermediary
Multi-attribute auctions have become increasingly popular in enterprise procurement. In the auctions, the elicitation of the preference of an auctioneer concerning multiple attributes is a central task in determining the winner(s). Considering the ...
Adaptive preference elicitation for top-K recommendation tasks using GAI-networks
AIAP'07: Proceedings of the 25th conference on Proceedings of the 25th IASTED International Multi-Conference: artificial intelligence and applicationsThe enormous number of questions needed to acquire a full preference model when the size of the outcome space is large forces us to work with partial models that approximate the user's preferences. In this way we must devise elicitation strategies that ...
Designing interfaces for explicit preference elicitation: a user-centered investigation of preference representation and elicitation process
Two problems may arise when an intelligent (recommender) system elicits users' preferences. First, there may be a mismatch between the quantitative preference representations in most preference models and the users' mental preference models. Giving ...
Reviews
Anoop kumar Malaviya
Recommender systems are discussed in this well-written and well-presented paper. The authors start with a proposition-"a negotiation is successful if both negotiators are satisfied with the final outcome"-and establish the need for a user-friendly method that would enable appropriate ordering, resembling the user's actual preferences. Based on a review of related literature, Pommeranz et al. assert that there are two major approaches for the design of a user interface for preference elicitation: deriving "a preference ranking from the (incomplete) information that users can provide [... and catering to] the goals, cognitive capacities, and emotions of the user." The authors use lexicographic ordering for preference elicitation and scoring. In particular, the user interfaces are evaluated in terms of effort, intuitiveness, ease of use, and users' likes/dislikes. The paper reports on the authors' experiment with 32 participants who were asked to perform eight tasks of choosing preferences on a nine-point scale; the effectiveness of the outcome is defined in terms of pleasure, dominance, and arousal. Based on this study, conducted over a two-week period, the authors conclude that the "multi-angle approach gives a richer understanding of the process of preference elicitation." However, the reported results of the study are not explicit or generic enough to define a design approach. The paper has 22 references. It provides some insight into the problem of effective preference elicitation, but I feel that-due to the limitations of the study-its conclusions may not hold when considering a much larger outcome space (that is, elicitation where a substantially larger number of user choices is available). Online Computing Reviews Service
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments