Under trusting eyes: the responsive nature of trust

Pelligra, Vittorio

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511522154.006

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 257 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…My claim is that it can be better understood if we assume that trustfulness may elicit trustworthiness, a mechanism that has been dubbed "trust responsiveness" (Pelligra 2005a(Pelligra , 2005b. Such responsiveness implies that payoffs cannot be taken from outside the game.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intentions, Trust and Frames: A Note on Sociality and the Theory of Games

Pelligra

2011

Review of Social Economy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S c o l l a b o r a c o n c e n t r i d i r i c e r c a e u n i v e r s i t à n a z i o n a l i e d i n t e r n a z i o n a l i ; è a t t i v o n e l l ' o r g a n i z z a r e c o n f e r e n z e a d a l t o c o n t e n u t o s c i e n t i f i c o , s e m i n a r i e a l t r e a t t i v i t à d i n a t u r a f o r m a t i v a ; t i e n e a g g i o r n a t e u n a s e r i e d i b a n c h e d a t i e h a u n a s u a c o l l a n a d i p u b b l i c a z i o n i . T E L . + 3 9 -0 7 9 -2 0 1 7 3 0 1 ; F A X + 3 9 -0 7 9 -2 0 1 7 3 1 2 T i t o l o : I n t e n t i o n s , T r u s t a n d F r a m e s : A n o t e o n S o c i a l i t y a n d t h e itAbstract: Psychological Game Theory (PGT) extends classical game theory allowing for the formal analysis of belief-dependent sentiments and emotions such as resentment, pride, shame, gratefulness, and the like. PGT incorporates these factors by relating agents' subjective expected utility to players' strategies, to their beliefs about others' strategies, but also to their beliefs about others' beliefs about their strategies, and so on. This paper argues that, thanks to the epistemic consequences of this hierarchy of beliefs, PGT is well-endowed to address, and to some extent solve three of the most challenging problems recently emerged in classical game theory, namely, the problem of intentions, that of trust and that of decision frames.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intentions, Trust and Frames: A Note on Sociality and the Theory of Games

Pelligra

2011

Review of Social Economy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[15]) and economics (ex. [16]), which conceives trust as necessarily mutual and respondent. In our model though, trust is not only interpersonal and it is not only addressed towards other persons.…”

Section: Trust and Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust & Self-Organising Socio-technical Systems

Castelfranchi¹,

Falcone²

2016

Trustworthy Open Self-Organising Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present our theory on trust and its components and dimensions, and apply it to trust in complex dynamic socio-technical systems and to their selforganising emergent results. Specifically, we apply our theory to ICT-based systems, where a "Social Order" is no longer fully "spontaneous" due to the invisible hand impinging on individual and selfish-decisions. In such contexts, a social order is rather based on programmed interactions, algorithmic procedures and big data. Since trust cannot be fully programmable and predictable, how can we build it in this complex and dynamic system? Some of our research questions sound: is it necessary that folks "understand" the underlying mechanisms they are relying on? What kind of information about forecasts or future projections should be provided and adjusted? What kind of role do simulation, serious games play on learning to understand and expect? Will there be algorithms working on the micro-processes and producing the emergent organisation, and if yes, how effective and reliable will they be? There are at least two different levels of trust in complex systems and in their functioning processes: trust in the emergent order and trust in the microlayer rules. Are the systems rules and resulting equilibriums fair, equity inspired, in relation to the interests of the involved groups/subjects? A complex and cognitive model of trust is needed for this analysis. Keywords PremiseWe will present some of the main features of our socio-cognitive theory of trust and its components (expectations, evaluations, desires, perceived risks) and bases, and apply this model to trust in complex dynamic socio-technical systems and to their self-organising emergent results. The aim is to discuss how we can build trust in C. Castelfranchi ( ) • R. Falcone

show abstract

“…As a matter of fact, if we interpret payoffs not in monetary terms but in utility terms, the distinction between material and psychological loses its analytical meaning (although it conserves a hermeneutical value). On this topic see also Battigalli and Dufwenberg (2005), Pelligra (2005). 6 Fehr and Schmidt (1999) and Bolton and Ockenfels (2000).…”

Section: Behavioural Economics and Reciprocitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is in this light that through the 1990s principles such as warm glow (Andreoni 1990), iniquity aversion (Fehr and Schimdt 1999), trust responsiveness (Pelligra 2005), teamthinking (Sugden 1993;Bacharach 1999) and others 3 were introduced. One of the first authors who formally incorporated the concept of reciprocity in a theoretical model was Rabin (1993).…”

Section: Reciprocity and Self-regarding Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%