observer experiments: studies in culturally filtered perception carnegie mellon university: dr....
TRANSCRIPT
Observer Experiments: Studies in Culturally Filtered Perception
• Carnegie Mellon University: Dr. Katia Sycara, Dr. Laurie Weingart, Dr. Roie Zivan
• University of Pittsburgh: Dr. Michael Lewis
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
2
Observer ExperimentsHe is insulting me by talking so much about
the quality of my goods!
He keeps changing the Subject. He must be trying to
Cheat me!
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
3
A’s culture
A’s history with B
Context
B’s culture
B’s history with A
ContextB’s behavior
A’s interpretation of B’s intent
A’s real intent
A’s behavior
B’s interpretation of A’s intent
B’s real intent
B’s schema
A’s schema
B’s schema
A’s schema
Capturing initial state of model
State Space
Initial Beliefs
Actions
Observations
Transition
Reward
Reward
Observer Experiments
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
4
Why we need Observer functions
• Party A responds to his perception of Party B’s:– Actions– Intentions– Predispositions
• Party B does the same• Neither party can perceive the true goals,
intentions, or beliefs of the other
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
6
Observer Functions may be influenced by
• Social Motives Orientation of observer
• Observer personality
• Culturally filtered perceptions
• Cultural stereotypes toward other culture
• Cultural stereotypes toward own culture
• Culturally influenced interpretations of behavior
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
7
Study of Observer Functions
• Allows isolating perception of individuals, culture and negotiation from goals and intentions of an active participant
• Models both intercultural and intracultural (personality) differences
• Provides a way to specify proximal stimuli involved in negotiating behavior
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
8
Experimental Plan• Videos and questionnaires integrated as Qualtrics
survey• Uses Merchant scenario from survey studies• Attribute items derived from Georgetown survey• Pilot testing (continuing) administered in lab for
US & Middle Eastern students• Web accessible version to include foreign
language subtitles and to-be-developed payment and consent mechanisms
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
9
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
12
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
14
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
15
Questions for the “Observer Experiment” Please circle your amount of agreement with the statements below on the scale from 1 to 7:1. Strongly disagree 2.Disagree 3.Slightly disagree 4.Neither agree nor disagree 5.Slightly
agree 6. Agree 7. Strongly agree.Respect:1. Paul/Nabil is honorable.
a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Paul/Nabil has strong negotiating skills.1. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 72. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Paul]/Nabil allowed the other merchant to save “face” (maintain his reputation).1. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 72. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
a. I respect Paul/Nabil.1. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 72. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Paul/Nabil respects the other merchant.• Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7• Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Paul/Nabil uses non respectful strategies.1. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 72. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
16
Trustworthiness:1. Paul/Nabil is trustworthy.
a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Paul/Nabil is honest.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. I would ask Paul/Nabil for a recommendation on a carpet next time I am interested in buying one.a. Nabil? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. I believe Paul/Nabil will be interested in doing business with his current partner in the future.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. I believe Nabil would ship a low quality product if he knew that Paul would not find out. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. I believe Paul would complain about the quality of the product if he knew that it would result in a reduction of the price.1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. I would consider doing business with Paul/Nabil.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Paul/Nabil cheats .a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
17
Cooperation vs Competition (social motive):
1.Paul/Nabil is trying to maximize his own gain regardless of the outcome for the other merchant.a.Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b.Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2.Paul’s/Nabil’s goal is to meet the other merchant half way on issues.a.Nabil? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b.Paul? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3.Paul/Nabil is trying to minimize the gain of the other merchant.1.Nabil? 1 2 3 4 5 6 72.Paul? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
a.Paul/Nabil is trying to get a much better outcome for himself than for the other merchant.1.Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 72.Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
b.Paul/Nabil is interested to work out a solution that serves both of their interests as much as possible.1.Nabil? 1 2 3 4 5 6 72.Paul? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
18
Altruism vs Self Interested:1. Paul/Nabil would do what he can to help the other merchant.
a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Paul/Nabil would do what he can to increase his own outcome, especially at the expense of the other merchant.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Fairness of process:1. Paul/Nabil is giving the other merchant’s perspective fair consideration.
1. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 72. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
a. Paul/Nabil dominates the conversation.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
b. Paul/Nabil listens to what the other merchant has to say.1. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 72. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
c. Paul/Nabil is a fair negotiator.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
19
Fairness of outcome: (only at end)1. The agreement was fair to Paul/Nabil:
a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. The agreement was equitable to Paul/Nabil.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. The agreement was just from Paul/Nabil’s perspective.a. Nabil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul 1 2 3 4 5 6 7(after each clip)
4. Paul/Nabil considers the following to be a fair outcome:a. 70% for himself and 30% for the other.
a. Nabil? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
b. 50% each.a. Nabil? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
• 30% for himself and 70% for the other.a. Nabil? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7b. Paul? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
20
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
22
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
24
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
26
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
28
Experimental SequenceCultural demographic (items)
Social motive orientation (items)
Picture of negotiators and narrative description (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 1- exposition (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Attribute scales (items)
Video segment 2- issues (presentation)
Video segment 3- blow-up Video segment 3- compromise Video segment 3- expand (presentation)
Attribute scales (items)
Outcome scales (items)
Personal demographics (items)
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
30
Experimental Design
OUTCOME US Middle Eastern
Blow-Up
Compromise
Expand
MURI 14 Program Review-- September 10, 2009
35
Data Analysis
• Repeated administration of convergent attitude items will support:– POMDP and other Bayesian models by
providing priors and state measures following transitions
– Psychometrically valid scales for investigating observer attitude and attitude change across the course of the negotiation