Responsibility Modelling and Its Application Trust Management

  • Andrew BlythEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9750)


A narrative of trust can be constructed via an explicative dialog that views trust as both a technical and social construct. From a technical viewpoint trust can be measured in-terms of reliability and dependability, while from a socio standpoint trust can be viewed as (a) the Need to trust, trust based on Identification, trust based on Competence and finally trust based on Evidence. In this paper we will develop a socio-technical model of trust that utilises the concepts of responsibilities and roles so as to link the technical and social aspects of trust into a single inductive logical framework. A role can be viewed from a structural and functional perspective allowing us to express the concepts of behaviour and within a socio-technical system and to logically reason about. We will further develop a logic graphical model of responsibility using both causal and consequential modal operators. From this model we will explore the relationship between the elements of a tasks execution and the actions communication associated with a task and hence a responsibility. We will use this logical model to show how a argument of consistency can be constructed and from that a measure of trust within a socio-technical construct derived.


Technical System Role Operator Model Business Process Kripke Semantic Role Relationship 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Biddle, B.J., Thomas, E.J.: Role Theory. Wiley, New York (1966)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dewsbury, G., Dobson, J.: Responsibility & Dependable Systems. Springer, London (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fox, W.M.: Socio-technical system principles and guidelines: past and present. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 31(1), 91–105 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sun, L.: An information systems security risk assessment model under Dempster-Shafer theory of belief functions. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 22(4), 109–142 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cooper, R., Foster, M.: Socio-techical systems. Am. Psychol. 26, 467–474 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Searle, J.R.: Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thomson, J.J.: Acts and Other Events. Contemporary Philosophy Series. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (1977)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sherry, K.J.: BPMN Pocket Reference: A Practical Guide To The International Business Process Model And Notation Standard BPMN Version 2.0. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, Seattle (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baxter, G., Sommerville, I.: Socio-technical systems: from design methods to systems engineering. Interact. Comput. 23(1), 4–17 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baxter, G.: Socio-technical systems. In: LSCITS Socio-Technical Systems Engineering Handbook. University of St Andrews (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Dam, K.H., Nikloic, I., Lukszo, Z. (eds.): Agent-Based Modelling of Socio-Technical Systems, 1st edn. Springer, Netherlands (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Charitoudi, K., Blyth, A.: A socio-technical approach to cyber risk management and impact assessment. J. Inf. Secur. 4(1), 33–41 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goldblatt, R.: A Kripke-Joyal semantics for noncommuntative logic in quantales. In: Advances in Modal Logic, vol. 6 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stirling, C.: Modal And Temporal Properties of Processes. Springer, New York (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Security Research Group (ISRG), Faculty of Computing, Engineering and ScienceUniversity of South Wales-PontypriddPontypriddUK

Personalised recommendations