Advertisement

Trust, Control, and Design

A study of computer scientists
  • Supriya Singh
  • Christine Satchell
Conference paper

Abstract

A qualitative study of computer scientists’ use of e-mail in Australian universities shows that computer scientists equate trust with control. They seek information that gives them control to personalise and scrutinise the system. In equating trust solely with control, computer scientists are unlike middle-income residential users or young people. The level of control that is demanded is often so great that computer scientists do not use the technologies they design. For “ordinary users,” “comfort” and “caring” — are important dimensions of trust. Computer scientists also differ from young users of new information and communication technologies. Young users see control primarily as physical control, rather than control over information to personalize and scrutinize the system.

This difference in the interpretation of trust means that when computer scientists design new information and communication technologies, they prioritise the design that gives them the control they want, rather than simplicity and ease of use, usefulness, comfort and caring. Computer scientists’ preference for this single dimension of trust needs to be consciously recognized and supplemented by more general users’ perspectives if they are to design technologies that can be easily and comfortably used by the average user.

This paper draws on three separate qualitative studies conducted by the authors. The first and central study is of computer scientists and their use of technologies with a focus on e-mail. The second and third studies — with which the first is compared — are of middle-income residential consumers’ use of money and a continuing study of young people’s use of technologies.

Keywords

Young People Mobile Phone Interpersonal Trust Ordinary User Young User 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agre, P., 1995, The soul gained and lost: artificial intelligence as a philosophical project. Stanford Humanities Review, 4: 2.Google Scholar
  2. Azvine, B., Dijan, D., Kwok, C. T., and Wobcke, W., 2000, The intelligent assistant: an overview, in: Intelligent Systems and Soft Computing, Azvine, B., Dijan, D., Kwok, C. T., and Wobcke, W., eds., pp. 215–238.Google Scholar
  3. Berkun, S., 2000, Why great technologies don’t make great products. Microsoft Corporation, http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnhfact/html/hfactor9_5.asp Accessed 10 September 2002
  4. Blackston, M., 1992, Observations: building brand equity by managing the brand’s relationships. Journal of Advertising Research, 32: 3.Google Scholar
  5. Bollier, D., 1996, The future of electronic commerce, A Report of the Fourth Annual Aspen Institute Roundtable on Information Technology. Aspen, Colorado: The Aspen Institute.Google Scholar
  6. Charmai, C., 2000, Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. in: Handbook of Qualitative Research, (Second ed.), N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, eds., Sage Publications, London, pp. 509–535.Google Scholar
  7. Cooper, A., 1999,. The Inmates are Running the Asylum. SAMS, Indianapolis.Google Scholar
  8. Dean, D., Felten, E., and Wallach, D., 1996, Java security: from HotJava to Netscape and beyond, Paper presented at the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, Oakland, California.Google Scholar
  9. Fahrenholtz, D, and Bartelt, A., Towards a sociological view of trust in computer science, Eighth Research Symposium on Emerging Electronic Markets, http://www-i5.informatik.rwthaachen.de/conf/rseem2001/papers/fahrenholtz.pdf Accessed 15 July 2003
  10. Friedman, B., and Nissenbaum, H., 1996, Software agents and user autonomy, Paper presented at the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Ganeson, S., 1994, Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58: 2.Google Scholar
  12. Giddens, A., 1994, The Consequences of Modernity, Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Goldberg, I., Wagner, D., Thomas, R., and Brewer, E. A., 1996, A Secure Environment for untrusted helper applications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th Usenix Security Symposium, San Jose, California.Google Scholar
  14. Helin, H., 2001, Bibliography on Software Agents AAAI Press, http://www.cs.Helsinki.FI/u/hhelin/agents/agent-bib.html Accessed 10 August 2001
  15. Kautz, H. A., Selman, B., Coen, M., and Ketchpel, S., 1994, An experiment in the design of software agents, Paper presented at the 1994 Software Agents Spring Symposium, Palo Alto.Google Scholar
  16. Kling, R., 1994, Organizational analysis in computer science, in: Social Issues in Computing: Putting Computing in its Place, C. Huff and T. Finholt, eds., McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, pp. 18–46.Google Scholar
  17. Kollock, P., 1994, The emergence of exchange structures: An experimental study of uncertainty, commitment, and trust, American Journal of Sociology, 100: 2.Google Scholar
  18. Lohman, N., 1988, Familiarity, confidence, trust: problems and alternatives, in Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, D. Gambetta, ed., Basil Blackwell, New York, pp. 94–107.Google Scholar
  19. Rogers, E. M., 1995, Diffusion of Innovations ( 4th edition ), The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Samarajiva, R., 1997, Interactivity as though privacy mattered, in: Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape, P. Agre and M. Rotenberg, eds., Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts pp.. 277–309.Google Scholar
  21. Sengers, P., 1999, Designing comprehensible agents, IJCAI-99: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint conference on artificial intelligence, 2.Google Scholar
  22. Singh, S., 2001, The effective use of corporate e-mail, Paper presented at the Pacific Telecommunications Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, 14–18 January.Google Scholar
  23. Singh, S., and Seegers, C., 1997, Trust and electronic money, Centre for International Research on Communication and Information Technologies, Melbourne Australia.Google Scholar
  24. Strauss, A., and Corbin, J., 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.Google Scholar
  25. Van Slyke, C., and Collins, R. W., 1995, Trust between users and their intelligent agents, Paper presented at the CIKM’95 Workshop on Intelligent Information Agents, Baltimore, Maryland.Google Scholar
  26. Vredenburg, K., Isensee, S., and Righi, C., 2002, User-Centered Design: An Integrated Approach, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Supriya Singh
    • 1
  • Christine Satchell
    • 1
  1. 1.RMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations