Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Trustfulness
.22
External Factors
Internal Factors
.5
.5
.03
.43
.1
Opportunity
.2
Danger
1.0
.4
Ability
.04
.28
.1
.42
.5
.5
.5
Unharmfulness
.5
.5
.5
.5
.0
.0
.5
.5
.12
.0
.5
.0
.5
Availability
.5
DE
DE
.0
DE
.5
.0
.3
C
.6
.0
.5
.0
.5
O/R
.42
.5
O/R
C
.0
.2
R
C
R
O/R
.0
.3
.3
O/R
R
.5
DE
R
.5
.0
.5
C
.5
.0
Ability = Efficacy
Availability = Accessibility
.0
.6
DE
O/R
.0
C
R
Figure 11.6
Routine Visit FCMs for the Machine. (Reproduced with kind permission of Springer
Science+Business Media
C
2003)
We can also see the influence of different personalities. For example, if we assume that
doctors are supposed to involve high external risks ('Danger
−
Reputation':
+
1), with the
usual values, the trustor's 'trustfulness' does not change very much (
good (
0.47))
.Butif
the patient is somebody who gives high importance to danger (danger:
total causality (
+
−
1)
),
the doctor's trustfulness decreases to
negative (
−
0.42)
.
11.12.2 Emergency Visit Scenario
We have here hypothesized an emergency situation where somebody needs a quick visit for
an easy task (e.g. a injection). In this scenario the values for the nodes are the same as before,
but some edges drastically change:
Reliability
becomes very important and
Ability
much less.
The values for the edges are:
Ability: little causation (
+
0.2);
Willingness: very strong causation (
+
1);
Unharmfulness: strong negative causation (
−
0.8);
Opportunity: middle causation (
+
0.5);
Danger: quite strong causation (
+
0.6).
Search WWH ::
Custom Search