  In this paper, we study a variant of hedonic games, called \textsc{Seat
Arrangement}. The model is defined by a bijection from agents with preferences
to vertices in a graph. The utility of an agent depends on the neighbors
assigned in the graph. More precisely, it is the sum over all neighbors of the
preferences that the agent has towards the agent assigned to the neighbor. We
first consider the price of stability and fairness for different classes of
preferences. In particular, we show that there is an instance such that the
price of fairness ({\sf PoF}) is unbounded in general. Moreover, we show an
upper bound $\tilde{d}(G)$ and an almost tight lower bound $\tilde{d}(G)-1/4$
of {\sf PoF}, where $\tilde{d}(G)$ is the average degree of an input graph.
Then we investigate the computational complexity of problems to find certain
``good'' seat arrangements, say \textsc{Maximum Welfare Arrangement},
\textsc{Maximin Utility Arrangement}, \textsc{Stable Arrangement}, and
\textsc{Envy-free Arrangement}. We give dichotomies of computational complexity
of four \textsc{Seat Arrangement} problems from the perspective of the maximum
order of connected components in an input graph. For the parameterized
complexity, \textsc{Maximum Welfare Arrangement} can be solved in time
$n^{O(\gamma)}$, while it cannot be solved in time $f(\gamma)^{o(\gamma)}$
under ETH, where $\gamma$ is the vertex cover number of an input graph.
Moreover, we show that \textsc{Maximin Utility Arrangement} and
\textsc{Envy-free Arrangement} are weakly NP-hard even on graphs of bounded
vertex cover number. Finally, we prove that determining whether a stable
arrangement can be obtained from a given arrangement by $k$ swaps is W[1]-hard
when parameterized by $k+\gamma$, whereas it can be solved in time $n^{O(k)}$.
