AI & SOCIETY

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 413–422 | Cite as

Computer-mediated trust in self-interested expert recommendations

  • Jonathan Ben-Naim
  • Jean-François Bonnefon
  • Andreas Herzig
  • Sylvie Leblois
  • Emiliano Lorini
Original Article

Abstract

Important decisions are often based on a distributed process of information processing, from a knowledge base that is itself distributed among agents. The simplest such situation is that where a decision-maker seeks the recommendations of experts. Because experts may have vested interests in the consequences of their recommendations, decision-makers usually seek the advice of experts they trust. Trust, however, is a commodity that is usually built through repeated face time and social interaction and thus cannot easily be built in a global world where we have immediate internet access to a vast pool of experts. In this article, we integrate findings from experimental psychology and formal tools from Artificial Intelligence to offer a preliminary roadmap for solving the problem of trust in this computer-mediated environment. We conclude the article by considering a diverse array of extended applications of such a solution.

Keywords

Trust Expert Conflict of interest Agent Reputation 

References

  1. Åqvist L (2002) Deontic logic. In: Gabbay DM, Geunther F (eds) Handbook of philosophical logic. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  2. Barber B (1983) The logic and limits of trust. Rutgers University Press, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  3. Castelfranchi C, Paglieri F (2007) The role of beliefs in goal dynamics: prolegomena to a constructive theory of intentions. Synthese 155:237–263CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Chellas BF (1980) Modal logic: an introduction. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen PR, Levesque HJ (1990) Intention is choice with commitment. Artif Intell 42:213–261MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Conte R, Castelfranchi C (1995) Cognitive and social action. London University College of London Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunn JR, Schweitzer ME (2005) Feeling and believing: the influence of emotion on trust. J Pers Soc Psychol 88:736–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Emerson EA (1990) Temporal and modal logic. In: van Leeuwen J (ed) Handbook of theoretical computer science, vol B: formal models and semantics. North-Holland/MIT Press, Amsterdam/CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferrin DL, Dirks KT, Shah PP (2006) Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust. J Appl Psychol 91:870–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gino F, Schweitzer ME (2008) Blinded by anger or feeling the love: how emotions influence advice taking. J Appl Psychol 93:1165–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harel D, Kozen D, Tiuryn J (2000) Dynamic logic. MIT Press, CambridgeMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Harvey N, Fischer I (1997) Taking advice: accepting help, improving judgment, and sharing responsibility. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 70:117–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hintikka J (1962) Knowledge and belief. Cornell University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Hollan J, Hutchins E, Kirsh D (2000) Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 7:174–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ito TA, Cacioppo JT (2005) Variations on a human universal: individual differences in positivity offset and negativity bias. Cogn Emot 19:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson-George CE, Swap WC (1982) Measurement of specific interpersonal trust: construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other. JJ Pers Soc Psychol 43:1306–1317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kramer RM (1999) Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annu Rev Psychol 50:569–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lewis JD, Weigert A (1985) Trust as social reality. Soc Forces 63:967–985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lorini E, Demolombe R (2008) Trust and norms in the context of computer security. In: Springer (ed) Proceedings of the ninth international conference on deontic logic in computer science (DEON’08), vol 5076 of LNCS, pp 50–64Google Scholar
  20. Lorini E, Herzig A (2008) A logic of intention and attempt. Synthese 163(1):45–77Google Scholar
  21. Lorini E, Herzig A, Castelfranchi C (2006) Introducing “attempt” in a modal logic of intentional action. In: Logics in artificial intelligence: 10th European conference (JELIA 2006), vol 4160 of LNAI, Springer, pp 280–292Google Scholar
  22. Maddux WW, Mullen E, Galinsky AD (2008) Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negociation outcomes. J Exp Soc Psychol 44:461–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manage Rev 20:709–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McAllister DJ (1995) Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad Manage J 38:24–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rao AS, Georgeff MP (1991) Modelling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR’91), Morgan Kaufmann, pp 473–484Google Scholar
  26. Rempel JK, Holmes JG, Zanna MD (1985) Trust in close relationships. J Pers Soc Psychol 49:95–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rousseau M, Sitkin S, Burt R, Camerer C (1998) Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust. Acad Manage Rev 23:393–404Google Scholar
  28. Schweitzer ME, Hershey JC, Bradlow ET (2006) Promises and lies: restoring violated trust. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 101:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Skowronski JJ, Carlston DE (1989) Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: a review of explanations. Psychol Bull 105:131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Slovic P (1993) Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Anal 13:675–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sniezek JA, Buckley B (1995) Cueing and cognitive conflict in judge-advisor decision making. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 62:159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Van Swol LM, Sniezek JA (2001) Trust, confidence and expertise in a judge-advisor system. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 84:288–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. White TB (2005) Consumer trust and advice acceptance: the moderating roles of benevolence, expertise, and negative emotions. J Consum Psychol 15:141–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yaniv I, Kleinberger E (2000) Advice taking in decision making: egocentric discounting and reputation formation. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 83:260–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yaniv I, Yates JF, Smith JEK (1991) Measures of discrimination skill in probabilistic judgment. Psychol Bull 110:611–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Ben-Naim
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jean-François Bonnefon
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Andreas Herzig
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sylvie Leblois
    • 2
  • Emiliano Lorini
    • 2
  1. 1.CNRSToulouseFrance
  2. 2.Université de ToulouseToulouseFrance
  3. 3.CLLE-LTC, Maison de la RechercheToulouse Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations