A Computational Approach to Homans Social Exchange Theory

Enayat, Taha; Ardebili, Mohsen Mehrani; Kivi, Ramtin Reyhani; Amjadi, Bahador; Jamali, Yousef

doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.14953

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Third, it contributes to the can inform decision-making, a key limitation is its inability to consider how the emergent structure or the state of the system affected the interaction among actors. For example, Enayat, et al 10 reported that the absence of emotional factors, such as feelings and anger, causes less group distinction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Human Exchange Decision-Making with Theoretically Informed Data and Machine Learning

Igwe

Durrheim

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial agents that can predict human decisions in social exchange contexts can potentially help to facilitate cooperation and promote prosocial behaviours. Modelling human decision-making is difficult in social exchange contexts where multiple contending motives inform decisions in rapidly evolving situations. We propose a mixed Theory and Data-Driven (TD2) model that is comprised of three modules: (1) a clustering algorithm that identifies strategies in interactive social exchange contexts (2) an artificial neural network that classifies an exchange decision into one of the identified strategies based on empirically defined motives and the observable differences during social exchanges, and (3) a hidden Markov model that predicts situated human decisions based on the strategies applied by humans over time. The TD2 decision-making model was trained and tested using 7,840 exchange data from "minimal group" experimental exchange games in which decisions were motivated by group ties, wealth aspiration, and interpersonal ties. The model was able to classify behaviours with 95% accuracy. Reciprocity, fairness and in-group favouritism were predicted, as separate decisions, with accuracies of 81%, 57% and 71% respectively. The performance of the model improved over time. Future work will evaluate the model in a live experiment involving Human-Agent Cooperation (HAC).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%