Archival Science

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 17–34 | Cite as

End users’ trust in data repositories: definition and influences on trust development

  • Ayoung Yoon
Original Paper


While repositories’ efforts to build trustworthy digital repositories (TDRs) led to the establishment of ISO standards, much less research has been done regarding the user’s side, despite calls for an understanding of users’ trust of TDRs. In order to learn about users’ perspectives on trust in digital repositories, the present study investigated users’ definitions of trust and factors that influence users’ trust development, particularly addressing the users of three data repositories in the United States. A total of 19 participants were interviewed in this study. The results of this study indicate that users’ definition of trust is largely based on a lack of deception, when it comes down to the specific context of data repositories. Regarding factors influencing the development of users’ trust in repositories, organizational attributes, user communities (recommendations and frequent use), past experiences, repository processes (documentation, data cleaning, and quality checking), and users’ perception of the repository roles were identified.


Trust Data repository Trusted digital repository 



I would like to give special thanks to Professor Barbara Wildemuth at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Information and Library Science, for her assistance with this study.


  1. Barber B (1983) The logic and limits of trust. Rutgers University Press, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
  2. Blomqvist K (1997) The many faces of trust. Scand J Mag 13(3):271–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Center for Research Libraries (CRL) (n.d) Certification of digital archives project. Accessed 30 Aug 2012
  4. Center for Research Libraries/Online Computer Library Center (CRL/OCLC) (2007) Trustworthy repositories audit & certification: criteria and checklist (TRAC. Version 1.0)Google Scholar
  5. Commission on Preservation and Access/Research Libraries Group (CPA/RLG) Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information (1996) Preserving digital information: report of the task force on archiving of digital informationGoogle Scholar
  6. Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) (2011) Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of candidate trustworthy digital repositories (No. CCSDS 652.1-M-1). The consultative committee for space data systemsGoogle Scholar
  7. Dobratz S, Schoger A, Strathmann S (2007) The nestor catalogue of criteria for trusted digital repository evaluation and certification. J Digit Inf 8(2). Accessed 13 Nov 2011
  8. Doney PM, Cannon JP (1997) An examination of the nature of trust in buyer–seller relationships. J Mark 61:35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Electronic Resource Preservation and Access Network (ERPANET) (2004) The role of audit and certification in digital preservation. Stadsarchief Antwerpen, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  10. Electronic Resource Preservation and Access Network (ERPANET) Workshop Report (2003) Trusted digital repositories for cultural heritage. Accademia nazionale dei Lincei, RomeGoogle Scholar
  11. Faniel I, Zimmerman A (2011) Beyond the data deluge: a research agenda for large-scale data sharing and reuse. Int J Digit Curation 6(1):58–69Google Scholar
  12. Gambetta D (1988) Can we trust trust? In: Gambetta D (ed) Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations. Basil Blackwell, New York, pp 213–237Google Scholar
  13. Giddens A (1990) The consequences of modernity. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  14. ISO 14721 (2002) Reference model for an open archival information system (OAIS)Google Scholar
  15. ISO/DIS 16363 (2012) Audit and certification of trustworthy digital repositoriesGoogle Scholar
  16. ISO/DIS 16919 (under development) Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of candidate trustworthy digital repositoriesGoogle Scholar
  17. Jantz R, Giarlo M (2007) Digital archiving and preservation: technologies and processes for a trusted repository. J Arch Organ 4:193–213. doi: 10.1300/J201v04n01_10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lewicki RJ, Bunker BB (1995) Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In: Kramer RM, Tyler TR (eds) Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research. Sage Publications, CA, pp 114–139Google Scholar
  19. Lynch C (2000) Authenticity and integrity in the digital environment: an exploratory analysis of the central role of trust. Authenticity in a digital environment pub92. Accessed 7 Nov 2011
  20. Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manag Rev 20(3):709–734Google Scholar
  21. McKnight DH, Cummings LL, Chervany NL (1998) Initial trust formation in new organizational relationship. Acad Manag Rev 23(3):473–490Google Scholar
  22. Mishra AK (1996) Organizational responses to crisis: the centrality of trust. In: Kramer RM, Tyler TR (eds) Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research. Sage Publications, CA, pp 261–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mooney H (2011) Citing data sources in the social sciences: do authors do it? Learn Publ 24(2):99–108. doi: 10.1087/20110204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. National Archives (2011) NARAtions: the blog of the United States National Archives (2011, March 15) ISO standards for certifying trustworthy digital repositories. Accessed 8 Sep 2011
  25. Nestor Working Group on Trusted repositories Certification (2006) Catalogue of criteria for trusted digital repositories: version 1. Accessed 20 Dec 2011
  26. Pirson M, Malhotra D (2011) Foundations of organizational trust: what matters to different stakeholders? Organ Sci 22:1087–1104. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0581 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Prieto AG (2009) From conceptual to perceptual reality: trust in digital repositories. Libr Rev 58(8):593–606. doi: 10.1108/00242530910987082 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Research Libraries Group/National Archives and Records Administration (RLG/NARA) Task Force on Digital Repository Certification (2005) Audit checklist for certifying digital repositories. Accessed 30 Aug 2011
  29. Research Libraries Group/Online Computing Library Center (RLG/OCLC) Working Group on Digital Archive Attributes (2002) Trusted digital repositories: attributes and responsibilities. Accessed 1 Jul 2011
  30. Ross S, McHugh MA (2005) Audit and certification of digital repositories: creating a mandate for the Digital Curation Centre (DCC). RLG DigiNews 9(5). Accessed 11 Nov 2011
  31. Rotter JB (1967) A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. J Pers 35:615–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rousseau DM, Sitkin SB, Burt RS, Camerer C (1998) Not so different after all: across-discipline view of trust. Acad Manag Rev 23(3):393–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sheppard BH, Sherman DM (1998) The grammars of trust: a model and general implications. Acad Manag Rev 23(3):422–437Google Scholar
  34. Tschannen-Moran M (2001) Collaboration and the need for trust. J Educ Adm 39(4):308–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yakel E, Faniel I, Kriesberg A, Yoon A (2013). Trust in digital repositories. Int J Digit Curation 8(1):143–156. doi: 10.2218/ijdc.v8i1.251 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information and Library ScienceUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations