In a social context, trust has some connotations. The definition of trust usually refers to situations characterized by the following aspects: One party (trustor) is willing to rely on the actions of the other (trustee); the situation is directed to the future. In addition, the trusted party (voluntarily or compulsory) ignores control over the actions of the trustee. Consequently, the trusting party is unsure about the outcome of the other's actions; they can only develop and evaluate expectations. Uncertainty involves the risk of failure or danger to a trusted party if the trustee will not behave as desired. Vladimir Ilych Lenin expressed this idea with the phrase "Good faith, better control".
Trust can be attributed to relationships among people. It can be shown that humans have a natural tendency to believe and value the beliefs that can be traced to the neurobiological structures and activities of the human brain. Some studies show that beliefs can be changed for example by application of oxytocin.
When it comes to the relationship between people and technology, attribution of trust is a matter of dispute. Deliberate attitude shows that trust can be legitimately associated with human relationships with complex technology. However, rational reflection leads to the denial of the ability to trust technological artifacts.
One of the main current challenges in social science is to rethink how rapid technological advances have affected constructs such as trust. This is especially true for information technology that dramatically alters the causes in social systems.
In the social sciences, the intricacies of trust are the subject of ongoing research. In sociology and psychology, the degree to which one party believes the other is a measure of belief in the honesty, justice, or virtue of the other. The term "belief" is more appropriate for trust in the competence of others. Failure in trust can be forgiven more easily if it is interpreted as a failure of competence rather than a lack of virtue or honesty. In economics, beliefs are often conceptualized as reliability in transactions. In all cases trust is a heuristic decision rule, allowing humans to deal with complexities that would require unrealistic effort in rational reasoning.
Video Trust (emotion)
Sociology
When it comes to trust, sociology is concerned with the position and role of trust in the social system. The importance of trust has grown significantly since the early eighties, from the early work of Luhmann, Barber and Giddens (see for a more detailed overview). The growing interest in this belief has been stimulated by the ongoing changes in society, characterized as late modernity and postmodernity.
Trust is one of several social constructions, an element of social reality. It is not outside our other vision. This image can be real or imaginary, but this one that allows the creation of Trust. Other constructs, often discussed with trust, are: control, confidence, risk, meaning, and power. Trust is naturally caused by the relationship between social actors, both individuals and groups (social systems). Since trust is a social construct, it is legitimate to discuss whether trust is trustworthy (ie.), That is whether social trust goes as expected.
Society needs trust as it increasingly finds itself operating on the edge between belief in what is known from everyday experiences, and possibly new possibilities. Without trust, all contingent possibilities should always be considered, leading to paralysis inaction. Trust can be seen as a bet on one of the futures contingent, which may be of benefit. Once the bet is decided (ie trust is awarded), the trustor postpones disbelief, and the possibility of negative action is not considered at all. Therefore, trust acts as a reductor of social complexity, enabling actions that are too complex to consider (or even impossible to consider at all); specifically for cooperation. Sociology tends to focus on two different views: the macro view of the social system, and the micro view of the individual social actors (where it borders on social psychology). Similarly, a view of belief follows this dichotomy. Therefore, on the one hand the role of systemic beliefs can be discussed, with a particular indifference to the psychological complexity underlying individual beliefs. Behavioral approaches to trust are usually assumed while the actions of social actors can be measured, leading to the modeling of statistical beliefs. This systemic approach can be contrasted with the study of social actors and their decision-making processes, in anticipation that understanding such a process would explain (and enable to model) the emergence of trust.
Sociology recognizes that future contingencies create dependence between social actors, and specifically that the trustor becomes dependent on the trustee. Trust is seen as one possible method for solving such dependence, becoming an attractive alternative to control. Trust is particularly valuable if the trustee is much stronger than the trustor, but the trustor is under a social obligation to support the trustee.
Modern information technology not only facilitates the transition to post-modern society, but they also challenge traditional beliefs. Empirical studies confirm a new approach to the traditional question of whether technological artifacts can be associated with trust. Trust is not caused by artefacts, but it is a representation of trust in social actors such as designers, creators and technology operators. The nature of technological artifacts forms a message to determine the trust of these agents.
Discussion about the impact of information technology is still ongoing. However, it should be noted the conceptual thinking of a technologically mediated social group, or the proposition of a socio-technical outlook that unites the beliefs, from the perspective of social actors.
Maps Trust (emotion)
Psychology
In psychology, trust believes that the person who is trusted will do what is expected. It starts in the family and grows for others. According to psychoanalyst Erik Erikson, basic belief development is the first state psychosocial development that occurred, or failed, during the first two years of life. Success produces feelings of security, trust and optimism, while failure leads to an insecurity and mistrust orientation that may result in a disruption of attachment.
The dispositional tendency of a person to trust others can be regarded as a personality trait and thus is one of the strongest predictors of subjective well-being. It has been argued that trust increases subjective well-being because it improves the quality of one's interpersonal relationships, and the happy person is skilled in fostering rapport.
Trust is an integral part of the notion of social influence: it is easier to influence or persuade a believer. The idea of ​​trust is increasingly adopted to predict acceptance of behavior by others, institutions (eg government agencies) and objects like machines. However, once again the perception of honesty, competence, and equal value (a bit like virtue) is very important. There are three different forms of belief. Trust is vulnerable to someone even when they can be trusted; Trust is the characteristic or behavior of one person who inspires positive expectations in others, and belief tendencies can rely on people. Once trust is lost, with a clear violation of one of these three determinants, it is very difficult to regain. Thus there is a clear asymmetry in the building versus the destruction of trust. Therefore being trustworthy and acting should be considered the only sure way to maintain a level of trust.
More research has been done on the idea of ​​trust and its social implications:
- Barbara Misztal, in her book, tries to combine all ideas of mutual trust. He shows three basic things that are believed to be done in people's lives: It makes social life predictable, it creates a sense of community, and it's < i> make it easier for people to work together .
- In the context of sexual belief, Riki Robbins explains the four stages of trust.
- In the context of Information theory Ed Gerck defines and differentiates trust with social functions such as power, oversight, and accountability.
- From the perspective of social identity, the tendency to trust strangers (see group favoritism) arises from shared knowledge of group group membership, stereotypes, or the need to maintain the positive group's uniqueness.
In addition to social influences, in organizational settings, trust can have a positive influence on one's behavior, perceptions, and performance. Trust has a circular relationship with the perception of organizational justice so that perceived justice leads to trust which, in turn, promotes the perception of justice in the future. One of the factors that increase trust in humans is the similarity of the face. Through the digital manipulation of facial similarity in a two-person sequential game of belief, supporting evidence found that having similar facial features (facial similarity) increases trust in the partners of each subject. Although face resemblance proves to increase trust, facial similarity has a decreased effect of sexual desire on a particular partner. In a series of tests, a digitally manipulated face is presented to the subject to be evaluated for attractiveness in the context of a long-term or short-term relationship. The results show that in the context of short-term relationships, which depend on sexual desire, similar facial features lead to a decrease in desire. In the context of a long-term relationship, which relies on trust, a similar facial feature enhances an individual's appeal, leading people to believe that the similarity of face and belief has a profound effect on relationships. Structure often creates trust in someone who encourages them to feel comfortable and excel at work. Working anywhere can be stressful and takes effort. By having a well-organized area for work, concentration will increase as well as effort. Structure is not just the ordering method. It increases trust and therefore makes the workplace manageable. A structured and orderly environment produces trust because one can increase cooperation and work at a higher level.
People can work together and achieve success through trust when working on projects that depend on the contribution of each individual.
Conversely, if trust does not exist, the project may fail, especially if this lack of trust has not been identified and addressed. This is one aspect of the VPEC-T analysis: This framework is used when studying information systems. Identifying and handling cases in which information providers, users of information, and those responsible for processing information not trusting each other may result in the elimination of risk factors for a project.
A person's social relationships characterized by low trust and norms that hamper academic engagement are expected to be associated with low academic achievement. Individuals who are in a relationship characterized by a high degree of social trust are more likely to exchange information openly and act compassionately toward one another than those who have no faith.
An important key to treating a child's sexual victimization is to rebuild trust between parent and child. Failure for adults to validate sexual harassment contributes to children's difficulties toward self-confidence and others. Trust is often influenced by erosion of marriage. Children from divorce do not show less trust in mothers, spouses, spouses, friends, and colleagues than their counterparts from whole families. The impact of parental divorce is limited to trust in fathers.
Social identity approach
The social identity approach explains trust in strangers as a function of group-based stereotypes or supportive behaviors in groups based on prominent group membership. With regard to the favoritism of ingroups, people generally think well of strangers but expect better treatment of members in groups compared to members outside the group. This greater expectation is then translated into a higher tendency to trust a member in the group than outside of the group. It has been shown that it is only advantageous to shape the expectations of foreigners within the group if they also know the membership of the receiving group.
There is considerable empirical activity associated with a social identity approach. Alocator studies are often used to understand group-based beliefs in foreigners. They can be operated as a unilateral or bilateral exchange relationship. Common social categories such as university affiliations, course majors, and even ad-hoc groups have been used to distinguish between in-group and out-group members. In a one-sided trust study, participants will be asked to choose between envelopes containing money previously allocated by group members or outside the group. They will not have previous or future opportunities for interaction, mimicking Brewer's notion that group membership is sufficient to realize group-based trust and hence cooperation. Participants can estimate numbers ranging from zero to the maximum value that an allocator can provide. In bilateral studies the beliefs have used investment games made by Berg and colleagues in which individuals can choose to give some or none of their money to others. Any given amount will be threefold and the recipient will then decide whether they will return the favor by giving money back to the sender. Trusting the behavior on the sender's side and the recipient's eligibility is ultimately provided through money-giving.
The above empirical research has shown that when group membership is made prominent and known by both parties, trust is given more easily to members in the group than to out-group members. This happens even when stereotypes in groups are relatively less positive than outside groups (eg psychology versus nursing majors), in the absence of a personal identity mark, and when participants have a definite amount of money choice (ie essentially choosing out of the need to trust people foreign). Conversely, when only the recipients who are made aware of group membership trust become dependent on group stereotypes. Groups with more positive stereotypes are believed (eg one's university affiliation on top of another), even more than that in-group (eg nursing psychology majors). Other reasons for the behavior of supporting groups in beliefs can be attributed to the need to maintain positive peculiarities within the group, especially in the face of the threat of social identity. It should also be noted that the belief in strangers outside the group increases when the personal identity of the identity is revealed.
Philosophy
Some philosophers argue that belief is more than a relationship of dependence. Philosophers like Annette Baier have made the distinction between trust and trust by saying that trust can be betrayed, while dependence can only be disappointed (Baier 1986, 235). Carolyn McLeod explains Baier's argument by giving the following examples: we can rely on our hours to give time, but we do not feel betrayed when corrupted, thus, we can not say we believe in it; we do not believe when we are suspicious of others, because this is actually an expression of mistrust (McLeod 2006). Thus, trust differs from dependence in the sense that the truster accepts the risk of being betrayed.
The definition of trust as a belief in something or a confident expectation about something leads to eliminating the idea of ​​risk from definition, because it does not include whether the hope or belief is beneficial or unfavorable. For example, to expect a friend to come late for dinner because he usually arrives late for the last fifteen years, is a confident expectation (do we agree with his late arrival.) Trust is not about what we want but in data consistency from our habits. As a result, there is no risk or betrayal because data now exists as collective knowledge.
Economy
Trust in economics is treated as an explanation for the difference between actual human behavior and that can be explained by the individual's desire to maximize one's utility. In economic terms, trust can provide an explanation of the difference between Nash's equilibrium and the observed balance. Such an approach can be applied to individuals and communities.
Trust is also seen as an economic lubricant, reducing transaction costs between parties, enabling new forms of cooperation and generally promoting business activities; work and prosperity. This observation creates a significant interest in considering trust as a form of social capital and has led the study to a closer understanding of the process of the creation and distribution of such capital. It has been claimed that higher levels of social trust are positively correlated with economic development. Although the original concept of 'high trust' and 'low trust' society may not be applicable, it has been widely accepted and shows that social trust benefits the economy and that low levels of trust hamper economic growth.
Theoretical economic modeling shows that the optimal level of trust that the rational economic agent must show in the transaction is the same as that of the other. Such a level of trust leads to an efficient market. Believing less leads to a loss of economic opportunity, believing more leads to unnecessary vulnerability and potential exploitation.
The economy is also interested in measuring confidence, usually in monetary terms. The correlation level between increasing profit margins or decreasing transactional costs can be used as an indicator of economic value of trust.
Economic 'trust games' are popularly used to empirically measure trust in relationships under laboratory conditions. There are several games and scenarios such as games related to beliefs that have been tried, with particular preferences for those who make it possible to estimate confidence in monetary terms. The game of trust is designed so that their Nash balance differs from the Pareto optimally so that no player can maximize his own utility by altering his selfish strategy without co-operation while cooperating partners can benefit.
The classic version of the trust game has been described as an abstract investment game, using an investor's scenario and a broker. Investors can invest a small portion of their money, and brokers can only recover some of their profits. If both players follow their best economic interests, investors should not invest and the broker will never be able to repay anything. Thus the flow of money, volume and character is due entirely to the existence of trust.
The game can be played as a one-off, or as a recurring one, between sets of the same or different players, to distinguish between the general tendency to believe and trust in a particular relationship. Several other variants of this game exist. The reversing rule leads to a game of distrust, pre-declarations can be used to establish player intentions, while profit distribution changes can be used to manipulate the perceptions of both players. This game can also be played by several players in the closed market, with or without information about reputation.
Other exciting games such as binary option trust games, gift exchange games, and various other forms of social games. Especially games based on the popular Prisoner Dilemma are used to link trust with economic utilities and show the rationality behind reciprocity.
The work of Rachel Botsman is also very important about the economics of collaboration.
The e-commerce population opens discussions about the confidence in the economy against new challenges while at the same time increasing the importance of trust, and the desire to understand the customer's decision to believe. For example, the interpersonal relationship between the buyer and the seller has been aligned by the technology, and should be corrected. Alternatively, websites can be created to convince buyers to trust sellers, regardless of actual seller confidence (e.g.). Reputation-based systems are enhanced on the assessment of trust by allowing to capture the collective perception of trust, generating significant interest in various reputation models.
System
In systems, trusted components have a set of properties that other components can rely on. If A trusts B, this means that violations in property B may compromise the correct operation of A. Note that property B trusted by A may not be quantitatively or qualitatively appropriate with the actual property B. This happens when the designer of the system as a whole does not take the relationship into account. Therefore, trust should be placed on the component's level of trust. Therefore, a reliable component is believed, not surprisingly, determined by how well it secures a range of functional and non-functional properties, derived from architecture, construction, and environment, and evaluated as necessary.
See also
References
Further reading
- Bachmann, Reinhard and Zaheer, Akbar (eds) (2006). Handbook of Trust Research . Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
- Bicchieri, Cristina, Duffy, John and Tolle, Gil (2004). "Trust among strangers", Philosophy of Science 71: 1-34.
- MarkovÃÆ'¡, I., Linell, P & amp; Gillespie, A. (2007). Trust and distrust in society. In MarkovÃÆ'¡, I. and Gillespie, A. (Eds.) Beliefs and distrust: socio-cultural perspectives. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
- Kelton, Kari; Fleischmann, Kenneth R. & amp; Wallace, William A. (2008). Trusting Digital Information. Journal of the American Society for Science and Information Technology , 59 (3): 363-374.
- Now, A., & amp; Choobineh, J. (1998, January). Trust in electronic commerce: Definitions and theoretical considerations. Paper presented at the 39th International Conference on Hawaii Systems Science, Kohala Coast, HI.
- Gillespie, A. (2007). Intersubjective dynamics of trust, unbelief and manipulation. At Markova and Gillespie (Eds), Trust & amp; Unbelief: The Socio-Cultural Perspective . Charlotte, NC: Info Age.
- Maister, David H., Green, Charles H. & amp; Galford, Robert M. (2000) Trusted Advisor . Free Press, New York
External links
- Trust in PhilPapers
- Trust in the Indiana Philosophy Ontology Project
- Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Trust". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy .
- Trust Building Activities
- Trust: Creating and Breaking Cooperative Relationships, edited by Diego Gambetta
- Can I be trusted? (1950) Educational video clips
- Stony Brook University's weekly seminar on personal, religious, social, and scientific issues of faith
- The World Harvey S. James, Jr., Ph.D (August 2007) Trust Database Various definitions of trust are collected and listed.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments