|
In a social context, trust has several connotations.〔McKnight, D. H., and Chervany, N. L. (1996). (The Meanings of Trust. Scientific report, University of Minnesota. )〕 Definitions of trust〔Mayer, R.C., Davis J.H., Schoorman F.D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review. 20 (3), 709-734.〕〔Bamberger, Walter (2010). ("Interpersonal Trust – Attempt of a Definition" ). Scientific report, Technische Universität München. Retrieved 2011-08-16.〕 typically refer to a situation characterized by the following aspects: One party (trustor) is willing to rely on the actions of another party (trustee); the situation is directed to the future. In addition, the trustor (voluntarily or forcedly) abandons control over the actions performed by the trustee. As a consequence, the trustor is uncertain about the outcome of the other's actions; they can only develop and evaluate expectations. The uncertainty involves the risk of failure or harm to the trustor if the trustee will not behave as desired. Trust can be attributed to relationships between people. It can be demonstrated that humans have a natural disposition to trust and to judge trustworthiness that can be traced to the neurobiological structure and activity of a human brain. Some studies indicate that trust can be altered e.g. by the application of oxytocin.〔Kosfeld, M., Heinrichs M., Zak, P. J., Fischbacher, U., and Fehr, E. (2005) Oxytocin increases trust in humans" ''Nature'' 435, 2005, 673-676.〕 Conceptually, trust is also attributable to relationships within and between social groups (history, families, friends, communities, organisations, companies, nations, etc.). It is a popular approach to frame the dynamics of inter-group and intra-group interactions in terms of trust.〔Hardin, R. (eds.) (2002). Trust and trustworthiness. Russell Sage Foundation.〕 When it comes to the relationship between people and technology, the attribution of trust is a matter of dispute. The intentional stance〔Dennett, D.C. (1989) The Intentional Stance. Bradford Books.〕 demonstrates that trust can be validly attributed to human relationships with complex technologies. However, rational reflection leads to the rejection of an ability to trust technological artefacts.〔Shneiderman, B. (2000) Designing trust into online experiences. Communications of the ACM Volume 43, Number 12, Pages 57-59〕 One of the key current challenges in the social sciences is to re-think how the rapid progress of technology has impacted constructs such as trust. This is specifically true for information technology that dramatically alters causation in social systems.〔Luhmann, N. (2005) Risk: a sociological theory. AldineTransaction.〕 In the social sciences, the subtleties of trust are a subject of ongoing research. In sociology and psychology the degree to which one party trusts another is a measure of belief in the honesty, fairness, or benevolence of another party. The term "confidence" is more appropriate for a belief in the competence of the other party. Based on the most recent research , a failure in trust may be forgiven more easily if it is interpreted as a failure of competence rather than a lack of benevolence or honesty. In economics trust is often conceptualized as reliability in transactions. In all cases trust is a heuristic decision rule, allowing the human to deal with complexities that would require unrealistic effort in rational reasoning. ==Sociology== When it comes to trust, sociology is concerned with the position and role of trust in social systems. Interest in trust has grown significantly since the early eighties, from the early works of Luhmann,〔Luhmann, N. (1979) Trust and Power. John Wiley & Sons.〕 Barber 〔Barber, B. (1983) The Logic and Limits of Trust. Rutgerts University Press.〕 and Giddens〔Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration; Polity Press, Cambridge 1984〕 (see 〔Sztompka, P. (1999) Trust: A Sociological Theory. Cambridge University Press.〕 for a more detailed overview). This growth of interest in trust has been stimulated by on-going changes in society, characterised as late modernity and post-modernity. Trust is one of several social constructs, an element of the social reality.〔Searle, J. R. (1995) The Construction of Social Reality. The Free Press〕 Other constructs, frequently discussed together with trust, are: control, confidence, risk, meaning and power. Trust is naturally attributable to relationships between social actors, both individuals and groups (social systems). Because trust is a social construct, it is valid to discuss whether trust can be trusted (e.g.〔Gambetta, D. (2000) Can We Trust Trust? In: Gambetta, D. (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, electronic edition, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, chapter 13, pp. 213-237.〕), i.e. whether social trust operates as expected. Society needs trust because it increasingly finds itself operating at the edge between confidence in what is known from everyday experience, and contingency of new possibilities. Without trust, all contingent possibilities should be always considered, leading to a paralysis of inaction. Trust can be seen as a bet on one of contingent futures, the one that may deliver benefits. Once the bet is decided (i.e. trust is granted), the trustor suspends his or her disbelief, and the possibility of a negative course of action is not considered at all. Because of it, trust acts as a reductor of social complexity, allowing for actions that are otherwise too complex to be considered (or even impossible to consider at all); specifically for cooperation.〔Bachmann R., (2001) Trust, Power and Control in Transorganizational Relations. Organization Studies 22(2), 337-365.〕 Sociology tends to focus on two distinct views: the macro view of social systems, and a micro view of individual social actors (where it borders with social psychology). Similarly, views on trust follow this dichotomy. Therefore, on one side the systemic role of trust can be discussed, with a certain disregard to the psychological complexity underpinning individual trust. The behavioural approach to trust is usually assumed 〔Coleman, J. (1990) Foundations of Social Theory. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.〕 while actions of social actors are measurable, leading to statistical modelling of trust. This systemic approach can be contrasted 〔Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R. (2000) Trust Is Much More than Subjective Probability: Mental Components and Sources of Trust. Proc. of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences-Volume 6.〕 with studies on social actors and their decision-making process, in anticipation that understanding of such a process will explain (and allow to model) the emergence of trust. Sociology acknowledges that the contingency of the future creates dependency between social actors, and specifically that the trustor becomes dependent on the trustee. Trust is seen as one of the possible methods to resolve such a dependency, being an attractive alternative to control.〔Mollering, G. (2005) The Trust/Control Duality: An Integrative Perspective on Positive Expectations of Others. In: Int. Sociology, September 2005, Vol. 20(3): 283–305. 2005.〕 Trust is specifically valuable if the trustee is much more powerful than the trustor, yet the trustor is under social obligation to support the trustee.〔Baier, A. (1986) Trust and antitrust. Ethics, vol. 96, pp. 231-260. Reprinted in: Moral Prejudices. Cambridge University Press.〕 Modern information technologies not only facilitated the transition towards post-modern society, but they also challenged traditional views on trust. Empirical studies 〔Lacohée, H., Cofta, P., Phippen, A., and Furnell, S. (2008) Understanding Public Perceptions: Trust and Engagement in ICT Mediated Services. International Engineering Consortium.〕 confirms the new approach to the traditional question regarding whether technology artefacts can be attributed with trust. Trust is not attributable to artefacts, but it is a representation of trust in social actors such as designers, creators and operators of technology. Properties of technological artefacts form a message 〔Bohmann, K. (1989). About the Sense of Social Compatibility. AI and Society. 3 (4), 323-331.〕 to determine trustworthiness of those agents. The discussion about the impact of information technologies is still in progress. However, it is worth noting a conceptual re-thinking of technology-mediated social groups,〔Willson, M. A. (2006) Technically Together: Rethinking Community within Techno-society. Peter Lang Publishing Inc.〕 or the proposition of a unifying socio-technical view on trust,〔Cofta, P. (2007). Trust, Complexity and Control: Confidence in a Convergent World. John Wiley and Sons.〕 from the perspective of social actors. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Trust (social sciences)」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|