Trust and Transitivity: How Trust-Transfer Works

  • Rino Falcone
  • Cristiano Castelfranchi
Part of the Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing book series (AINSC, volume 156)


Transitivity in trust is very often considered as a quite simple property, trivially inferable from the classical transitivity defined in mathematics, logic, or grammar. In fact the complexity of the trust notion suggests evaluating the relationships with the transitivity in a more adequate way. In this paper, starting from a socio-cognitive model of trust, we analyze the different aspects and conceptual frameworks involved in this relation and show how different interpretations of these concepts produce different solutions and definitions of trust transitivity.


Trust Relationship Scientific Meeting Nonmonotonic Reasoning Subjective Logic Trust Transfer 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Marsh, S.P.: Formalising Trust as a computational concept. PhD thesis. University of Stirling (1994),
  2. 2.
    Yu, B., Singh, M.P.: Searching social networks. In: Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 65–72. ACM Press (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sabater, J.: Trust and Reputation for Agent Societies, PhD thesis. Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Falcone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: The Socio-Cognitive Dynamics Of Trust: Does Trust Create Trust? In: Falcone, R., Singh, M., Tan, Y.-H. (eds.) AA-WS 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2246, pp. 55–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R.: Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (2010) ISBN 978-0-470-02875-9Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhuiyan, T., Josang, A., Xu, Y.: An analysis of trust transitività taking base rate into account. In: Proceeding of the Sixth International Conference on Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, July 7-9, University of Queensland, Brisbane (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li, X., Han, Z., Shen, C.: Transitive trust to executables generated during runtime. In: Second International Conference on Innovative Computing, Information and Control (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Golbeck, J., Hendler, J.: Inferring binary trust relationships in web-based social networks. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 6(4), 497–529 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Meyer, J.J.C., van der Hoek, W.: A modal logic for nonmonotonic reasoning. In: van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.J.C., Tan, Y.H., Witteveen, C. (eds.) Non-Monotonic Reasoning and Partial Semantics, pp. 37–77. Ellis Horwood, Chichester (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Falcone, R., Piunti, M., Venanzi, M., Castelfranchi, C.: From Manifesta to Krypta: The Relevance of Categories for Trusting Others. ACM Transaction on IST (in press, 2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burnett, C., Norman, T., Sycara, K.: Bootstrapping trust evaluations through stereotypes. In: van der Hoek, Kaminka, Lesperance, Luck, Sen (eds.) 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2010), Toronto, Canada, pp. 241–248 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tavakolifard, M., Herrmann, P., Öztürk, P.: Analogical Trust Reasoning. In: Ferrari, E., Li, N., Bertino, E., Karabulut, Y. (eds.) IFIPTM 2009. IFIP AICT, vol. 300, pp. 149–163. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Christianson, B., Harbison, W.: Why Isn’t Trust Transitive? In: Lomas, M. (ed.) Security Protocols 1996. LNCS, vol. 1189, pp. 171–176. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Cognitive Sciences and TechnologiesNational Research CouncilRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations