Socio-Cognitive Model of Trust: Basic Ingredients - Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model - page 65

This feature of trust strictly derives from our founding trust on reliance on a non-directly
controlled process and agent, on the perception of this 'non-complete control', and risk; on
the distinction between trust 'in' Y , and global trust (internal attribution); on the idea of
'delegation': of deciding to count upon such a process/agent. If I do not decide to depend on
this, I do not care about its non-controllability.
Reliance is a much broader phenomenon than trust . It even covers cases where the agent is
unaware of the needed mediation. Let us consider the various cases and degrees before trust.
a) X does not understand or know whether to rely on a given agent or process. However, the
positive result - due also to Y 's action - reinforces and reproduces X 's behavior and his
reliance on Y. 38 We can call this ' confidence' .
b) X is aware of the contribution of Y , but he doesn't decide to rely on Y ;itisjustso.Itis,
for example, when I just become aware of my confidence and reliance in a given support;
I realize that it is only thanks to Y (that physical support? The obscure work of that guy?)
that my activity was possible and effective.
c) X decides to rely on Y (not necessarily because he trusts Y ; even without trusting Y ;for
example it is obliged to).
d) X decides to count on Y ,but Y is not an autonomous agent ; Y doesn't decide 'to do' what
X needs (for example, I rely on the fact that - after this - she will be tired; or I decide to
rely/bet on the fact that tomorrow it will be sunny).
e) X decides to rely on Y because she trusts Y (autonomous agent), but X does not rely on Y 's
adoption of his goal (not 'genuine' trust).
The 'act' of trust is not reducible to reliance; 'to trust' (as act) implies 'counting on', which
implies 'to rely on', but is more than this.
'Counting on' is not just relying, it is first of all an (originally) conscious reliance; the agent
knows to rely on a given process and entity. Moreover, this reliance is not simply the discovery
of a state of fact, of a static given situation; it is a decision and the result of a decision, or at
least a course of events, something that X expects will happen while 'doing' something. X is
doing something (or deciding to do something) and she expects that this process will bring
a good/desired result thanks to the action of another entity, that will create some necessary
condition for the successful realization of the act or of the goal.
Counting on means to have in mind a multi-agent plan, where the action (the contribution)
of Y is enclosed; and where X has to do her share, at least deciding to counting on, or deciding
to do nothing (which is an action) and delegating and waiting for the result, or at least expecting
for. 39
Trust (as act) of course is not just counting on, it is counting on based on a good evaluation
(of Y s capacity and predictability) and on a good expectation. Moreover, to count on may be
weaker - as a degree of certainty - than to trust , or less 'free'; trust in an autonomous decision
based on an internal evaluation or feeling. One might 'count on' something even when pushed,
38 While walking actually I'm implicitly and unconsciously relying on the floor; until I do not have some nasty
surprise.
39 In other words: Counting on it is not just to 'delegate', but is to do my share since and until I assume that Y will
do his own share. Delegating is (deciding to) allocate/assign an action to Y in order - then - to count on this. They
are two complementary moves and attitudes; two faces of the same complex relation.