Other
Definitions (Top)
Gerck, E. (1998)
“Toward Real-World Models of Trust:
Reliance on Received Information”, The Meta-Certificate
Workgroup, http://mcwg.org/mcg-mirror/trustdef.htm.
(“Real-world or Social: The concept of
social trust can be obtained from dictionaries, such as Merriam
Webster: ‘ 1 a : assured reliance on the character, ability,
strength, or truth of someone or something b : one in which
confidence is placed. 2 a : dependence on something future
or contingent : HOPE b : reliance on future payment for property
(as merchandise) delivered : CREDIT 3 a : a property interest
held by one person for the benefit of another b : a combination
of firms or corporations formed by a legal agreement; especially
: one that reduces or threatens to reduce competition 4 archaic:
TRUSTWORTHINESS 5 a (1) : a charge or duty imposed in faith
or confidence or as a condition of some relationship (2):
something committed or entrusted to one to be used or cared
for in the interest of another b : responsible charge or office
c : CARE, CUSTODY <the child committed to her trust>’)
Handfield, R.,
(2003) "Can You Trust the Concept of Trust in Supply
Chain Relationships? Part I: What Does It Mean to Trust?",
NC State University Supply Chain Resource Consortium Reports
from the SCRC Director.
("In both serious social thought
and everyday discourse, it is assumed that the meaning of
trust and of its many apparent synonyms is so well known that
it can be left undefined or to contextual implications."
Barber (1983:7) Hosmer (op cit 380)”)
Riegelsberger,
Jens, "Trust in Mediated Interactions", 27 June
2005. The article references Zand (1972), Boss (1978),
Mayer et al. (1995), McAllister (1995), Rocco (1998), and
Corritore et al. (2001).
("Trust
is the willingness to be vulnerable based on positive expectations
about the actions of others.")
Hart C. W., and Johnson M. D. (1999) "Growing
the trust relationship", Marketing Management.
("Having
the confidence that the other party will not exploit one's
vulnerabilities.")
Hacker,
S. K., Willard, M. A., and Couturier, L. (2002) “The Trust
Imperative”, American Society of Quality, pp. 33.
("A
person's willingness to accept and/or increase their vulnerability
to another person based on their perception of the other person's
capability, commitment, and consistency.")
Wikipedia,
at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust.
("In
sociology, trust is the willing acceptance of one person's
power to affect another.")
("In general, trust refers to an
aspect of a relationship between two parties, by which a given
situation is mutually understood, and commitments are made
toward actions in favor of a desired outcome. In contrast
with hope, trust is almost strictly interpersonal. In contrast
with faith, trust is almost always considered a subordinate
material form whereas "faith" is typically reserved
for a "higher power" - God, etc.")
Abdul-Rahman, A. (2005) “A Framework for Decentralised Trust
Reasoning”, PhD thesis, University College London, p68.
("Misztal gives a good summary of
how trust has been perceived by social scientists: What intergrates
all the above definitions of trust is their common emphasis
on the importance of several properties of trust relationships.
The main common characteristic ... is its 'dependence on something
future or contingent; future anticipation'. ... they require
a time lapse between one's expectations and the other's action.
... that to trust involves more than believing; in fact, to
trust is to believe despite uncertainty. ... always involves
an element of risk ... from our inability to monitor others'
behaviours, from our inability to have a complete knowledge
about other people's motivations and, generally, from the
contingency of social reality. Consequently, one's behaviour
is influenced by one's beliefs about the likelihood of others
behaving or not behaving in a certain way rather than solely
by a cognitive understanding or by firm and certain calculation.")
Gerck,
E. (1998) “Toward Real-World Models of Trust: Reliance on Received Information”, The Meta-Certificate Workgroup,
http://mcwg.org/mcg-mirror/trustdef.htm.
(“GENERATED GLOSSARY: Trust
General definition of trust (a general
model of trust):
·
‘trust is that which is essential to a communication channel
but cannot be transferred from a source to a destination using
that channel’.
Derived definitions (i.e., applied models):
·
‘trust about an entity's behavior on matters of x is that
which an observer has estimated at epoch T with a variance
as small as desired’,
·
‘trust about an entity's behavior on matters of x is that
which an observer has estimated with high-reliance at epoch
T’,
·
‘trust is a set of natural and logical connections between
expected and actual behavior’,
·
‘trust is expected fulfillment of behavior’,
·
‘trust is to expect all previously observed behavior’,
·
‘trust is to expect absence of any previously unobserved behavior’,
·
‘trust is an intersubjective statement that stands behind
an authorization’,
·
‘trust is an open-loop control process of an entity's response
on matters of x’,
·
‘trust is to rely upon actions at a distance’,
·
‘trust is to rely upon reactions at a distance’,
·
‘trust is to rely upon actions or reactions at a different
point in space or time’,
·
‘trust is qualified reliance on information, based on factors
independent of that information’,
·
‘trust is reliance on received information, coherently with
some extent’,
·
‘trust is that which an observer can rely upon to some known
extent regarding a subject matter’,
·
‘trust is what an observer knows about an entity and can rely
upon to a qualified extent’,
·
‘trust is received information which has a degree of belief
that is acceptable to an observer’,
·
‘trust is knowledge acceptable by an observer’,
·
‘trust is knowledge about one's perception of a fact’,
·
‘trust is that which provides meaning to information’,
·
‘trust is a link between a local set of truth-values and a
remote set of truth-conditions’,
·
‘trust is a link between reference and referent’,
·
‘trust is a link between referent and sense’,
·
‘trust is a link between reference and sense’,
·
‘trust is measurable by the coherence of understanding’,
·
‘trust is that which absence can make any state possible’,
·
‘trust is that which absence can make any state transition
possible’,
·
‘trust is that which absence can make a process non-ergodic’,
·
‘trust is that which absence cannot justify reliance’,
·
‘trust is time measured without a clock and/or space measured
without a scale’,
·
‘trust is a link between conceptual and perceptual realities’,
·
(objective) ‘trust is a coherent collective agreement’,
·
(intersubjective) ‘trust is a bilateral agreement, not necessarily
balanced’,
·
(subjective) ‘trust is what you know you know you know’ --
i.e., you know, you can recall at will and you know how to
use,
·
...
Trust is not:
·
surveillance,
·
auditing,
·
reputation,
·
authorization,
·
closed-loop control,
·
insurability,
·
indemnifiability,
·
belief,
·
accountability,
·
hope,
·
intuition,
·
faith,
·
unqualified,
·
the inverse of risk,
·
the absence of risk,
·
transitive,
·
distributive (in psychological, sociological and legal sense),
·
associative (in mathematical sense; also in psychological,
sociological and legal sense),
·
symmetric.
Trust values: Trust has a minimum of
three possible values: +, 0 and -
·
+ trusted according to policy(+), here called trust
·
0 trust value not assigned by either policy(+) or policy(-),
here equivalent to the statement ‘needs zero trust’
·
- trusted according
to policy(-), here called distrust
The respective (+) and (-) policies define
the extent of trust for each positive and negative range.
The trust value depends on the extent of trust. The larger
the extent, the more you trust (or distrust). However, within
that extent trust (or distrust) is always 100%.”)