## 4 Results
### Analyses on the Five Documents Obtained by Joining All the Sentences with the Same Class  
A series of analyses were conducted to mine the semantic differences between the documents. The distribution of the users' prevalent ROCI-II style is summarized in Figure 10. The complete dataset consisted of documents is distributed as specified in Table 5. It is interesting to underline the difference in the average number of words per sentence (average sentence length) as shown in Table 5. In order to investigate the difference, an ANOVA with LSD post-hoc analysis was conducted on the distributions of the sentence lengths. Significant differences were found, and the summary of the results of the post-hoc analysis is shown in Figure 11. Participants classified as predominantly Avoiding, Dominating and Obliging produced significantly shorter sentences than Integrating ones, while sentences classified as Compromising did not significantly differ than the other styles' sentences. Avoiding, Dominating and Obliging sentence lengths all resulted with a very similar average length, as can be seen with the \(p\) level of 1.0 in the table. Concerning the term frequency, an analysis of the occurrences of the words and pronouns was performed. All the results from this section were processed from stemmed tokens excluding the stopwords. Table 6 displays the most frequent words in their absolute counts that occurred in each of the documents and their relative occurrence regarding their proportion on the whole dataset (normalized from 0 to 1). Table 7 displays the most frequent personal pronouns and their absolute counts and normalized frequency. As shown, \"You\" was by far the most frequent pronoun in each document, while the occurrence of \"It\" and \"I\" is similar in proportion across the documents, not showing any significant difference. The most frequent terms, instead, were verbs connected to the specific scenario they were used in (\"watch\" in reference to a TV program within the scenario in which the virtual agent was Dominating, \"take\" in reference to the specific objects of the negotiation). The differences among the documents, instead, is evidenced by the third most frequent term. Avoiding and Compromising, the negotiation styles that are less engaged and motivated to continue the negotiation, show a higher frequency of the verb \"Go\", that is semantically related to a tendency to put off the discussion or take an immediate decision, while Dominating, Integrating and Obliging styles show \"Let\" as the third most frequent term, a word associated with a direct proposal and therefore a wish to continue negotiating. Figure 11: Mean, standard deviations and ANOVA post-hoc analysis of the sentence length among the documents. Significant results are marked and annotated on top with the \(p\) level. Considering that the personal pronouns with the highest frequencies, as shown in Table 6, were \"You\" and \"I\", we investigated whether their use was similar across documents. For this purpose, the context--defined as semantic concordance, i.e., the tokens that are more frequently associated and used before or after each word [39]--in which these personal pronouns were used in each document was measured with the Leacock-Chodorow algorithm [36]. The pronoun \"It\" was not included since it is semantically ambiguous [29]. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 8. While Avoiding, Compromising and Integrating display the use of \"You\" and \"I\" similarly with each other and with the pronoun \"We\", a peculiar difference is with the styles Obliging and Dominating. In the Dominating document, in fact \"You\" is used in context with imperative verbs or proposals (\"Could\", \"Go\" and \"Take\"), while \"I\" is associated with \"Help\" and, more importantly, with \"Pizza\", that is the object of negotiation in the scenario in which the user deals with an Integrating agent.