Dynamics of Trust - Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model - page 157

Table 6.3 Cases in which there has been delegation to Y

Trustee's
Performance

Good
Collaboration

Bad
Collaboration

Trustier's
Mind

> 0
> ; (Y more TTE)
= ; (Y equal TTE)
< ; (Y less TTE)

< 0 = 0
= 0; (Y less TTE)
< 0 |

+ ' > 0
( > 0;

|< '; (Y

' > 0)

less TTE)
< 0 | |> '; ( Y
no trustworthy )

> 0 = 0 < 0

| |> | |> '; ( Yno

trustworthy )

+ ' > 0
( < 0;

(Y more TTE)

| |> | |= ';(Y less TTE)

' > 0)

| |> | |< '; (Y less TTE)

| |= ; (Y equal TTE)

| |< ; (Y more TTE)

< 0

| |> ; (Y more TTE)

| |= ; (Y equal TTE)

+ ' > 0
( > 0;

< 0 = 0

| |< | |< + '; ( Y no

trustworthy )

' < 0)

| |< | |> + '; (Y less

TTE)

( Y no trustworthy )

S-Delegates(X Y τ )

with DoT XY τ ≤ σ ; where σ is a minimal 'reasonable threshold' to delegate the

task τ and

Bel (Y (DoT XY τ ≤ σ ))

Such a diffidence could be implicit or explicit in the delegation: it is not
important.

Neither is it important, in this specific analysis, if

DoT XY τ = )

(in other words, if X's diffidence in Y is objectively justified or not).

trustworthiness(Y τ )orDoT XY τ = trustworthiness(Y τ

This distrust could, in fact, produce a change (either positive or negative) in Y 's trustwor-
thiness:

Y could be disturbed by such a bad evaluation and have a worst performance (we will not
consider here, but in general in these cases of diffidence there is always some additional
actions by the delegating agent: more control, some parallel additional delegation, and
so on);