Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Assuming that the various credibility degrees are independent from each other, we can say
(for simplicity we consider
p
=
g
X
):
p
)]
∗
C
ab
DoC
X
[
Ability
Y
(
)]
∗
DoT
XY
τ
=
C
opp
DoC
X
[
Opp
Y
(
α,
α
×
C
w
ill
DoC
X
[
WillDo
Y
(
α,
p
)]
(3.3)
where:
C
opp
,
C
ab
, and
C
will
are constant values and represent the weights of the different credibility
terms
8
: they take into account the variable
relevance
or
importance
of the different com-
ponents of
Y
's trustworthiness. Depending on the kind of task, on
X
's personality, etc,
Y
's
competence
or
Y
's
reliability
do not have equal impact on his global trustworthiness for task
τ
, and on
X
's decision.
is quite a technical task (like repairing an engine, or a surgical intervention)
Y
's competence is more important, and its
weight
in the evaluation and decision is more
determinant; if
If, for example,
τ
is not technically demanding but its deadline is very important then
Y
's
punctuality or reliability is more relevant than his competence or skills.
DoC
X
[Opp
Y
(
α
,p)]
, is the degree of credibility of
X
's beliefs (for
X
herself) about
Y
's
opportunity of performing
τ
to realize
p
; in more simple words, it takes into account all the
contextual factors in which
Y
is considered to act.
DoC
X
[Ability
Y
(
α
)]
, the degree of credibility of
X
's beliefs (for
X
herself) about
Y
's ability/
competence to perform
α
;
DoC
X
[WillDo
Y
(
α
,p)]
, the degree of credibility of
X
's beliefs (for
X
herself) about
Y
's actual
performance.
α
In a case in which
Y
is a cognitive agent, the last degree (
DoC
X
[WillDo
Y
(
α
,p)]
) will become:
p
)]
∗
DoC
X
[
Persist
Y
(
DoC
X
[
WillDo
Y
(
α,
p
)]
=
DoC
X
[
Intend
Y
(
α,
α,
p
)]
and can be interpreted as the degree of credibility of
X
's beliefs (for
X
herself) about
Y
's
willingness to actually perform
to realize
p
; where the willingness can be split in the
composition of intention and persistence.
Finally, of course:
α
0
≤
DoC
X
[
Opp
Y
(
α,
p
)]
≤
1; 0
≤
DoC
X
[
Ability
Y
(
α
)]
≤
1;
0
≤
DoC
X
[
WillDo
Y
(
α,
p
)]
≤
1
.
3.4 To Trust or Not to Trust: Degrees of Trust and Decision to Trust
In this paragraph we analyze the complex process of taking a real (reason-based) decision
about trusting or not, on the basis of the mental ingredients described in Chapter 2 and of their
quantitative values.
8
In fact the role of these factors would be more complex than simple constant values, they should represent the
set of non linear phenomena like saturation effects, possible interference among the different credibility degrees,
and so on.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search