Trust is a judgement of unquestionable utility — as humans we use it every day of our lives. However, trust has suffered from an imperfect understanding, a plethora of definitions, and informal use in the literature and in everyday life. It is common to say “I trust you, ” but what does that mean? This thesis provides a clarification of trust. We present a formalism for trust which provides us with a tool for precise discussion. The formalism is implementable: it can be embedded in an artificial agent, enabling the agent to make trust-based decisions. Its applicability in the domain of Distributed Artificial Intelligence (DAI) is raised. The thesis presents a testbed populated by simple trusting agents which substantiates the utility of the formalism. The formalism provides a step in the direction of a proper understanding and definition of human trust. A contribution of the thesis is its detailed exploration of the possibilities of future work in the area. Summary 1. Overview This thesis presents an overview of trust as a social phenomenon and discusses it formally. It argues that trust is: • A means for understanding and adapting to the complexity of the environment. • A means of providing added robustness to independent agents. • A useful judgement in the light of experience of the behaviour of others. • Applicable to inanimate others. The thesis argues these points from the point of view of artificial agents. Trust in an artificial agent is a means of providing an additional tool for the consideration of other agents and the environment in which it exists. Moreover, a formalisation of trust enables the embedding of the concept into an artificial agent. This has been done, and is documented in the thesis. 2. Exposition There are places in the thesis where it is necessary to give a broad outline before going deeper. In consequence it may seem that the subject is not receiving a thorough treatment, or that too much is being discussed at one time! (This is particularly apparent in the first and second chapters.) To present a thorough understanding of trust, we have proceeded breadth first in the introductory chapters. Chapter 3 expands, depth first, presenting critical views of established researchers.

Giant strides in information technology at the turn of the century may have unleashed unreachable goals. With the invention of groupware, people expect to communicate easily with each other and accomplish difficult work even though they are remotely located or rarely overlap in time. Major corporations launch global teams, expecting that technology will make “virtual collocation” possible. Federal research money encourages global science through the establishment of “collaboratories. ” We review over 10 years of field and laboratory investigations of collocated and noncollocated synchronous group collaborations. In particular, we compare collocated work with remote work as it is possible today and comment on the promise of remote work tomorrow. We focus on the sociotechnical conditions required for effective distance work and bring together the results with four key concepts: common ground, coupling of work, collaboration readiness, and collaboration technology readiness. Groups with high common ground and loosely coupled work, with readiness both for collaboration

Davis, Gerald Smith and Aks Zaheer for their helpful reviews and comments on earlier versions of this paper. Trust is a key enabler of cooperative human actions. Three main deficiencies about our current knowledge of trust are addressed by this paper. First, due to widely divergent conceptual definitions of trust, the literature on trust is in a state of construct confusion. Second, too little is understood about how trust forms and on what trust is based. Third, little has been discussed about the role of emotion in trust formation. To address the first deficiency, this paper develops a typology of trust. The rest of the paper addresses the second and third deficiencies by proposing a model of how trust is initially formed, including the role of emotion. Dispositional, interpersonal, and impersonal (system) trust are integrated in the model. The paper also clarifies the cognitive and emotional bases on which interpersonal trust is formed in early relationships. The implications

Our trust conceptualizations have benefited from discussions with Ellen Berscheid and Larry Cummings of the University of Minnesota. The authors also thank three anonymous reviewers from the Organizational Behavior division of the 1996 meeting of the Academy of Management for their comments on an earlier version of this paper. THE MEANINGS OF TRUST What does the word ‘trust ’ mean? Scholars continue to express concern regarding their collective lack of consensus about trust’s meaning. Conceptual confusion on trust makes comparing one trust study to another problematic. To facilitate cumulative trust research, the authors propose two kinds of trust typologies: (a) a classification system for types of trust, and (b) definitions of six related trust types that form a model. Some of the model’s implications for management are also outlined. 2 THE MEANINGS OF TRUST “...trust is a term with many meanings. ” (Williamson, 1993: 453) “Trust is itself a term for a clustering of perceptions. ” (White, 1992: 174) Scholars and practitioners widely acknowledge trust's importance. Trust makes cooperative endeavors happen (e.g., Arrow, 1974; Deutsch, 1973; Gambetta, 1988). Trust is a key to positive interpersonal relationships in

ABSTRACT: Trust is a vital relationship concept that needs clarification because researchers across disciplines have defined it in so many different ways. A typology of trust types would make it easier to compare and communicate results, and would be especially valuable if the types of trust related to one other. The typology should be interdisciplinary because many disciplines research e-commerce. This paper justifies a parsimonious interdisciplinary typology and relates trust constructs to e-commerce consumer actions, defining both conceptual-level and operational-level trust constructs. Conceptual-level constructs consist of disposition to trust (primarily from psychology), institution-based trust (from sociology), and trusting beliefs and trusting intentions (primarily from social psychology). Each construct is decomposed into measurable subconstructs, and the typology shows how trust constructs relate to already existing Internet relationship constructs. The effects of Web vendor interventions on consumer behaviors are posited to be partially mediated by consumer trusting beliefs and trusting intentions in the e-vendor. KEY WORDS AND PHRASES: Customer relationships, human issues in e-commerce, Internet consumers, trust.

ABSTRACT: This paper aims to predict consumer acceptance of e-commerce by proposing a set of key drivers for engaging consumers in on-line transactions. The primary constructs for capturing consumer acceptance of e-commerce are intention to transact and on-line transaction behavior. Following the theory of reasoned action (TRA) as applied to a technology-driven environment, technology acceptance model (TAM) variables (perceived usefulness and ease of use) are posited as key drivers of e-commerce acceptance. The practical utility of TAM stems from the fact that e-commerce is technology-driven. The proposed model integrates trust and perceived risk, which are incorporated given the implicit uncertainty of the e-commerce environment. The proposed integration of the hypothesized independent variables is justified by placing all the variables under the nomological TRA structure and proposing their interrelationships. The resulting research model is tested using data from two empirical studies. The first, exploratory study comprises three experiential scenarios with 103 students. The second, confirmatory study uses a sample of 155 on-line consumers. Both studies strongly support the e-commerce acceptance model by validating the proposed hypotheses. The paper discusses the implications for e-commerce theory, research, and practice, and makes several suggestions for future research.

We propose a new theoretical framework for understanding simultaneous trust and distrust within relationships. grounded in assumptions of multidimensionality and the inherent tensions of relationships. and we separate this research from prior work grounded in assumptions of unidimensionality and balance. Drawing foundational support for this new framework from recent research on simultaneous positive and negative sentiments and ambivalence. we explore the theoretical and practical significance of the framework for future work on trust and distrust relationships within organizations.

Despite the inherent risk arising from separating buyers and sellers, networked online marketplaces are proliferating. We describe how online auction marketplaces take advantage of institutional structures to build buyer trust in auction sellers, mitigate risk, increase satisfaction, and promote transaction intentions. It is hypothesized, based on institutional trust (Zucker 1986), that buyer trust in auction sellers can be increased, beyond past experience with sellers, through structural assurances, such as buyer-driven certification, auction house escrows, and credit card guarantees. We examined buyer transaction intentions, mediated by trusting beliefs, risk reduction, and satisfaction. The model is tested with 274 buyers in Amazon’s online auction marketplace. The results support the hypotheses, highlighting the importance of institution-based trust in online networks. Implications are discussed. Keywords: Institution-based trust, online auctions, institutional structures, certification, escrows, third-party guarantees

Abstract not found

Building on the theory of swift trust, we empirically examine the dynamic nature of trust and its changing patterns in both cognitive and affective elements between high- and lowperforming teams over time (early, middle, and late stages of project). Using data from 38, fourperson student teams from six universities competing in a web-based business simulation game over eight-week periods, we found that both high- and low-performing teams started with similar levels of trust in both cognitive and affective dimensions. However, high-performing teams were better at developing and maintaining the trust level throughout the project life. Moreover, virtual teams relied more on a cognitive than an affective element of trust. These findings provide a preliminary step toward understanding the dynamic nature and relative importance of cognition-and affect-based trust over time.