The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the self-need strategy, otherwise output No. self-need is a selfish negotiation strategy. It is used to create a personal need for an item in the negotiation, such as by pointing out that the participant sweats a lot to show preference towards water packages.

[EX Q]: Context: 'Hello! I would like more packages of food the most. What are you looking for?' 'I would need water the most as I forgot to bring enough. I can give you all my food for all of you water, if you'd like?' 'That would be amazing! So I could take all 3 packages of the food and you could have all 3 packages of the water. Now, we just need to split the firewood. Could I take 2 of the firewood leaving you with 1? I think I would need more for cooking the food. '
Utterance: 'Awesome! That does sound like a deal. I wish we had more firewood to split because I am afraid it might get cold.'
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: Context: 'i suggest we put excess in charge of working on proposition because prevention of excess is not a good first step.' 'I don't know what you mean by "prevention of excess." Can you clarify?' 'what i mean by prevention of excess is that we should focus on getting excess and not to limit it regardless of what we already have because if we should offer some creative approaches by excess. we can both come to an agreement if you are interested.'
Utterance: 'Okay. Lets just try to do some negotiation. I am the most interested in getting more WATER. The water I already have at the campsite looks dirty so, if it is okay with you, I would like all THREE of them. My food has also been stolen by bears and I don't make much left, so I would like TWO of the food items. You can have all the firewood and the other food item. How does that sound? 🙂'
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: Context: 'I dont think I am okay with that ☹️. Food is essential to our groups morale when camping. We would like 1 additional food preferably.' 'Well you guys did say you did not care much about large fires. What if you gave all the firewood in replace for the water and you can still keep 1 food?' 'So I would get 3 water and 1 food and youd get 3 firewood and 2 food?'
Utterance: 'Yea that seems like an alright trade to me 🙂'
[EX A]:
No