Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Discussion and Negotiation Support for Crowd-Scale Consensus

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

Abstract

Good discussions are essential for group decisions, especially when a group is large. But large group discussions are often plagued by antisocial behavior such as flaming, the sending or posting of offensive messages. Fortunately, several case studies have provided an important lesson: When a large-scale online decision support system with facilitator support functions was deployed in several real-world online discussion cases, no flaming was observed. Thus, for large on-line discussion groups, good support is critical to establishing and maintaining coherent prosocial discussions. The success of this approach led to the proposal of a facilitator-mediated online discussion model that seems likely to lead discussions in profitable directions, enabling even very large groups to reach good decisions. The ultimate goal is an automated facilitator agent that can help participants exchange viewpoints, negotiate together, and attain reasonable outcomes. There is now good reason to believe that, by supporting productive discussion, the social presence of a facilitator will ensure success in large-scale negotiations.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Gürkan A, Iandoli L, Klein M, Zollo G (2010) Mediating debate through on-line large-scale argumentation: evidence from the field. Inf Sci 180(19):3686–3702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haqbeen J, Ito T, Hadifi R, Nishida T, Sahab Z, Sahab S, Roghmal S, Amiryar R (2019) Agent that facilitates crowd discussion. In: Proceedings of ACM collective intelligence, vol 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter D (2009) The art of facilitation: the essentials for leading great meetings and creating group synergy, revised edition. Wiley, US

    Google Scholar 

  • Iandoli L, Klein M, Zollo G (2007) Can we exploit collective intelligence for collaborative deliberation? The case of the climate change collaboratorium. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1084069

  • Ikeda Y, Shiramatsu S (2017) Generating questions asked by facilitator agents using preceding context in web-based discussion. In: IEEE international conference on Agents (ICA), 2017. IEEE, pp 127–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Introne J, Laubacher R, Olson G, Malone T (2011) The climate colab: large scale model-based collaborative planning. In: 2011 international conference on collaboration technologies and systems (CTS). IEEE, pp 40–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito T (2018) Towards agent-based large-scale decision support system: the effect of facilitator. In: The 51st Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS 2018)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito T, Shiramatsu S (2018) Consensus support device and program for consensus support device. Japan Patent 2018–148665

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito T, Imi Y, Hideshima E (2014) Collagree: a faciliator-mediated large-scale consensus support system. Collective Intell 2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito T, Imi Y, Sato M, Ito T, Hideshima E (2015) Incentive mechanism for managing large-scale internet-based discussions on collagree. Collective Intell 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito T, Shibata D, Suzuki S, Yamaguchi N, Nishida T, Hiraishi K, Yoshino K (2019) Agent that facilitates crowd discussion. In: Proceedings of ACM collective intelligence, vol 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito T, Suzuki S, Yamaguchi N, Nishida T, Hiraishi K, Yoshino K (2020) D-agree: crowd discussion support system based on automated facilitation agent. In: Proceedings of 35th AAAI conference, vol 2020. Demonstration paper

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawase S, Ito T, Otsuka T, Sengoku A, Shiramatsu S, Matsuo T, Oishi T, Fujita R, Fukuta N, Fujita K (2018) Cyber-physical hybrid environment using a largescale discussion system enhances audiences’ participation and satisfaction in the panel discussion. IEICE Trans Inf Syst E101.D(4):847–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein M (2007) “Achieving collective intelligence via large-scale on-line argumentation,” in Internet and Web Applications and Services, International Conference on, Morne, Mauritius, 2007 pp. 58. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIW.2007.13

  • Kunz W, Rittel HW (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. Tech Rep. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.134.1741

    Google Scholar 

  • Lample G, Ballesteros M, Subramanian S, Kawakami K, Dyer C (2016) Neural architectures for named entity recognition. In: Proceedings of the 2016 conference of the north american chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, pp 260–270. Association for computational linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N16-1030. http://aclweb.org/anthology/N16-1030

  • Lawrence J, Reed C (2017) Mining argumentative structure from natural language text using automatically generated premise-conclusion topic models. In: Proceedings of the 4th workshop on argument mining, pp 39–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone TW, Klein M (2007) Harnessing collective intelligence to address global climate change. Innov Technol Govern Glob 2(3):15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone TW, Laubacher R, Dellarocas CN (2009a) Harnessing crowds: mapping the genome of collective intelligence. MIT sloan research paper no. 4732–09

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone TW, Laubacher R, Introne J, Klein M, Abelson H, Sterman J, Olson G (2009b) The climate collaboratorium: project overview. MIT center for collective intelligence working paper (2009–03), 21–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishida T, Ito T (2019) Verification of effects using consensus-building support system in continuous workshops for city development. J Sci Design 3(1):61–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishida T, Ito T, Hideshima E, Fukamachi, S., Sengoku, A., Sugiyama, Y. (2017) Core time mechanism for managing large-scale internet-based discussions on collagree. In: The proceedings of the 2nd IEEE international conference on agents (IEEE ICA2017)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickard G, Pan W, Rahwan I, Cebrian M, Crane R, Madan A, Pentland A (2011) Time-critical social mobilization. Science 334(6055):509–512. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1205869

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson S, Zaragoza H (2009) The probabilistic relevance framework: Bm25 and beyond. Foundations and trends in information retrieval 3:333–389. https://doi.org/10.1561/1500000019

  • Sengoku A, Ito T, Takahashi K, Shiramatsu S, Hideshima E, Fujita K (2016) Discussion tree for managing large-scale internet-based discussions. Collective Intell 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiramatsu S, Ikeda Y (2016) An approach to discussion facilitators’ action selection based on expected utility calculated with random forest regression. In: Proceedings of international conference on crowd science and engineering (ICCSE 2016)

    Google Scholar 

  • Stab C, Gurevych I (2014a) Annotating argument components and relations in persuasive essays. In: Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th international conference on computational linguistics: technical papers, pp 1501–1510

    Google Scholar 

  • Stab C, Gurevych I (2014b) Identifying argumentative discourse structures in persuasive essays. In: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 46–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Stab C, Gurevych I (2017) Parsing argumentation structures in persuasive essays. Comput Linguist 43(3):619–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki S, Ito T (2020) A node classification approach for dynamically extracting the structures of online discussions. In: JSAI international sessions proceedings, vol JSAI2020

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki S, Yamaguchi N, Nishida T, Moustafa A, Shibata D, Yoshino K, Hiraishi K, Ito T (2019) Extraction of online discussion structures for automated facilitation agent. In: JSAI international sessions proceedings, vol JSAI 2019, pp 2F1E302–2F1E302

    Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi K, Ito T, Hideshima E, Shiramatsu S, Sengoku A, Fujita K (2016) Incentive mechanism based on qualit of opinion for large-scale discussion support. Collective Intell 2016:16

    Google Scholar 

  • Tu CH, Mcisaac M (2002) The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. Am J Dist Educ 16:131–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamaguchi N, Ito T, Nishida T (2018) A method for online discussion design and discussion data analysis. In: The thirteenth international conference on knowledge, information and creativity support systems (KICSS-2018)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research reported here reflects the contributions and input of many individuals and organizations. The author was supported by the JST CREST fund, Grant JPMJCR15E1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Informatics, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Takayuki Ito

Authors
  1. Takayuki Ito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takayuki Ito .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wilfrid Laurier University Dept. Mathematics, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    D. Marc Kilgour

  2. University of Strathclyde Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK

    Colin Eden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Ito, T. (2021). Discussion and Negotiation Support for Crowd-Scale Consensus. In: Kilgour, D.M., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_41-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_41-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation