Trust, Control and Autonomy: A Dialectic Relationship - Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model - page 210

Plan '

g'

'

2

5

3

6 4

7

1

Figure 7.11 Composition Relationship

Delegation/Adoption Adjustments with Respect to the Specification Dimension

Also in these cases we must consider the intervention of both the client/trustor and the contrac-
tor/trustee with regard to delegation and adoption, respectively. Before analyzing the different
cases included in this dimension, we show (also graphically) the meaning of the relationship
about action composition (we called it Dom-c : Dom-c(

α α

) defines this relationship between

α α ).

Given Figure 7.11 we can say that the plan (complex action)

and α , where α is a component action of

α gives the results for achieving
the goal g . This complex action is constituted from a set of different actions related with each
other by the composition relationship (for example: Make-Dinner is constituted at a first level
from Buy-food , Prepare-food and Cook-food ; each of this action is, in its turn, constituted
from other elementary or complex actions, and so on).
In fact, each of the actions shown in Figure 7.11 produces (temporary or final) results: see
Figure 7.12. Temporary results will not be present in the results produced by the plan at the
end of its execution (while final results will be present).

Delegee's Adjustments

The reasons for the delegee's adjustments can be of different nature and related to selfish or
cooperative goals. In any case, these reasons cannot be irrespective of the evaluation of his own

g'

'

r 2 r 5

2

5

r 6 r 3

3

r

r 4

6 4

r 7

r 1 7

1

Figure 7.12 Composition Relationship with the evidence of the component action results