Emotional synthetic characters are able to evaluate (appraise) events as positive or negative with their emotional states being triggered by several factors. Currently, the vast majority of  models for appraisal in synthetic characters consider factors related to the goals and preferences of the characters. We argue that appraisals that only take into consideration these "personal" factors are incomplete as other more social factors, such as the normative and the social context, including in-group and out-group relations, should be considered as well. Without them, moral emotions such as shame cannot be appraised, limiting the believability of the characters in certain situations. We present a model for the appraisal of characters' actions that evaluates whether actions by in-group and out-group members which conform, or not, to social norms generate different emotions depending on the social relations between the characters. The model was then implemented in an architecture for virtual agents and evaluated with humans. Results suggest that the emotions generated by our model are perceived by the participants, taking into account the social context and that participants experienced very similar emotions, both in type and intensity, to the emotions appraised and generated by the characters.

The cognitive research on reputation has shown several interesting properties that can improve both the quality of services and the security in distributed electronic environments. In this paper, the impact of reputation on decision-making under scarcity of information will be shown. First, a cognitive theory of reputation will be presented, then a selection of simulation experimental results from different studies will be discussed. Such results concern the benefits of reputation when agents need to find out good sellers in a virtual market-place under uncertainty and informational cheating.

The study of opinions, their formation and change, is one of the defining topics addressed by social psychology, but in recent years other disciplines, as computer science and complexity, have addressed this challenge. Despite the flourishing of different models and theories in both fields, several key questions still remain unanswered. The aim of this paper is to challenge the current theories on opinion by putting forward a cognitively grounded model where opinions are described as specific mental representations whose main properties are put forward. A comparison with reputation will be also presented.

The study of opinions, their formation and change, is one of the defining topics addressed by social psychology, but in recent years other disciplines, like computer science and complexity, have tried to deal with this issue. Despite the flourishing of different models and theories in both fields, several key questions still remain unanswered. The understanding of how opinions change and the way they are affected by social influence are challenging issues requiring a thorough analysis of opinion per se but also of the way in which they travel between agents' minds and are modulated by these exchanges. To account for the two-faceted nature of opinions, which are mental entities undergoing complex social processes, we outline a preliminary model in which a cognitive theory of opinions is put forward and it is paired with a formal description of them and of their spreading among minds. Furthermore, investigating social influence also implies the necessity to account for the way in which people change their minds, as a consequence of interacting with other people, and the need to explain the higher or lower persistence of such changes.

Despite the increasing diffusion of the Internet technology, TV remains the principal medium of communication. People's perceptions, knowledge, beliefs and opinions about matter of facts get (in)formed through the information reported on by the mass-media. However, a single source of information (and consensus) could be a potential cause of anomalies in the structure and evolution of a society. Hence, as the information available (and the way it is reported) is fundamental for our perceptions and opinions, the definition of conditions allowing for a good information to be disseminated is a pressing challenge. In this paper starting from a report on the last Italian political campaign in 2008, we derive a socio-cognitive computational model of opinion dynamics where agents get informed by different sources of information. Then, a what-if analysis, performed trough simulations on the model's parameters space, is shown. In particular, the scenario implemented includes three main streams of information acquisition, differing in both the contents and the perceived reliability of the messages spread. Agents' internal opinion is updated either by accessing one of the information sources, namely media and experts, or by exchanging information with one another. They are also endowed with cognitive mechanisms to accept, reject or partially consider the acquired information.

The Second International Conference on Multiagent Systems (ICMAS-96) Workshop on Norms, Obligations, and Conventions was held in Kyoto, Japan, from 10 to 13 December 1996. Participants included scientists from deontic logic, database framework, decision theory, agent architecture, cognitive modeling, and legal expert systems. This article summarizes the contributions chosen for presentation and their links to these areas.

In adjacent agents from dropping their commitments; (held in Kyoto, Japan, on 10-13 December domains (logical philosophy, social or better, how to regulate 1996). Both the program committee philosophy, decision theory), both legal agents dropping their commitments and the contributors included and social norms have received to a joint action to not disrupt the scientists from different backgrounds considerable, if not satisfactory, attention. The discussion addressed on, has contributed dramatically to These tasks have now entered the several issues: (1) What is the the attention given by the scientific MAS field's common knowledge. Often action is reduced to decision authorization, access regulation, For example, the existence of so-called (that is, a choice among one's privacy maintenance, respect of decency, Georgeff 1991) have shown that we and Tennenholtz 1992). Why? Don't we need a reciprocity.