Socio-Cognitive Model of Trust: Basic Ingredients - Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model - page 47

Good evaluations, positive beliefs, good reputation, are just potential trust. Trust also implies
a (potential or actual) decision of 'counting on' Y , of risking something while betting on it. It
cannot just be a positive evaluation where X is not concerned and involved. X can evaluate that
Y has such a good quality ( X likes it), or has done or even will do such a good action, but this
doesn't mean that X trusts Y (for that quality or action): X has to consider the possibility to
rely on this action and quality for achieving some goal of hers in the future. Trust is about the
future and about potentially exploiting something (that's why X 'likes' Y ). (See Section 2.6.2).
To be more precise, a positive evaluation of Y is not 'trust' per se , even as a simple trust
attitude or disposition, because it must be considered within a possible frame . It is a matter of
the 'gestalt' nature of complex mental states. The side of a square is a linear segment; but: is
a segment the side of a square? Not per se; only if considered, imagined, within that figure,
as a component of a larger configuration that changes its meaning/role. Analogously: trust is
based on and implies a positive evaluation, and when there is not yet a decision/intention it just
consists in this, but only if viewed in a perspective of the potential larger mental state .Given
X's positive beliefs (evaluation) about Y (as for something), if it is the case X might decide to
rely on Y . In this sense those evaluations are a pre-disposition to trust, a trust attitude towards Y .
The same holds for the 'prediction' about Y's behavior. It is not yet trust. It is trust only as
a possible 'positive expectation', that is in relation to a goal of X and in the perspective of a
possible reliance on it (see below).
Decomposing a 'gestalt' is not reducing it to its components.
So the correct representation of the trust 'core' would be the insertion of the basic square
(Figure 2.4) within the broad potential phenomenon.
Notice that this can just be the view of an 'observer': I see in X a trust attitude, predisposition,
potential, towards Y . Actually in X's mind there is just a good evaluation of Y .
We can arrive at a true/full trust disposition of X towards Y if this thought has been formulated
in X's mind. X not only has a positive evaluation of Y , but she has explicitly considered this as
a potential, a base for a possible (non excluded) delegation to Y: 'If I want I could count on Y
as for

.' . (For a clear distinction - on such
a basis - between mere potential attitude and a real 'disposition' see later Section 2.3.2).
This is the psychological relationship between a mere positive evaluation of Y and a positive
evaluation as a trust component or basic trust attitude.

... ', 'If it will be the case I might rely on Y, since ...

Trust as Positive Expectation

On the basis of her positive beliefs about Y 's powers and willingness (or actualization) X
formulates a prediction about Y 's behavior and outcomes. This is why a lot of scholars define
trust in terms of an expectation . However, an expectation is not simply a prediction (or a strong
prediction).
So trust is a positive expectation. Where a positive expectation is the combination of a
goal and of a belief about the future (prediction). X in fact both believes that Y will do
the action

and desires/wishes/plans so. And she both believes and wants that the goal g X
will be realized (thanks to Y ). 21

α

Moreover, X is 'expecting', that is, waiting and checking

21 The fact that when X trusts Y, X has a positive expectation, explains why there is an important relationship between
trust and hope, since hope implies some positive expectation (although weaker and passive: it does not necessarily
depend on X , X cannot do anything else to induce the desired behavior); and why trust can be 'disappointed'.