Cited by 1,185Technology Adoption and User BehaviourInformation and Cyber SecurityPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection

Trust in a specific technology: An investigation of its components and measures

Mcknight, D. Harrison, Carter, Michelle, Thatcher, Jason Bennett, Clay, Paul F.·2011·ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems

Abstract

Trust plays an important role in many Information Systems (IS)-enabled situations. Most IS research employs trust as a measure of interpersonal or person-to-firm relations, such as trust in a Web vendor or a virtual team member. Although trust in other people is important, this article suggests that trust in the Information Technology (IT) itself also plays a role in shaping IT-related beliefs and behavior. To advance trust and technology research, this article presents a set of trust in technology construct definitions and measures. We also empirically examine these construct measures using tests of convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity. This study contributes to the literature by providing: (a) a framework that differentiates trust in technology from trust in people, (b) a theory-based set of definitions necessary for investigating different kinds of trust in technology, and (c) validated trust in technology measures useful to research and practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1985347.1985353

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Trustworthiness judgments in humans or technology have different characteristics, yet they both are premised on the same underlying contextual conditions: risk, uncertainty and lack of control.

    “Trustworthiness judgments in humans or technology have different characteristics, yet they both are premised on the same underlying contextual conditions: risk, uncertainty and lack of control (McKnight et al. 2011).”
  • Trust in technology has previously been seen in light of the technology's functionality, ability to provide help and operational reliability and the technology provider's integrity, benevolence and competence, including privacy aspects.

    “Trust in technology has previously been seen in the light of the technology's functionality, ability to provide help and operational reliability and the technology provider's integrity, benevolence and competence-including privacy aspects (McKnight et al., 2011;Prakash and Das, 2020;Ta et al., 2020).”

    From My Chatbot Companion - a Study of Human-Chatbot Relationships (2021) · cites this paper as McKnight et al., 2011

  • In canonical models of trust formation, the trustworthiness of trustees is a combination of internal factors, such as ability to fulfill expectations, and external conditions, such as institutional structures that provide structural assurances, situational normality, common knowledge, shared expectations, and safeguards.

    “In the canonical models of trust formation, such (Giddens, 1990; Mayer et al., 1995; McKnight et al., 2011; Misztal, 1996) trust is described to have a number of different components. First, trust depends on the personal characteristics of the trustor, such as their propensity to trust, something which I do not discuss in this article. Second, trust is a factor of the perceived or actual char”
  • Trust is a complex concept and is built upon human users' interaction and consequent assessment of the system from cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions.

    “Nevertheless, trust is a complex concept and is built upon human users’ interaction and consequent assessment of the system from cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions [91-93].”
  • Specific trust in people and trust in technology differ in terms of the nature of the object of dependence and on important trusting beliefs.

    “Specific trust in people and trust in technology not only differ in terms of the nature of the object of dependence but also on important trusting beliefs.”

    From Trustworthy artificial intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as McKnight et al. 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mcknight, D. H., Carter, M., Thatcher, J. B., & Clay, P. F.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Clemson University (US)
  • Washington State University (US)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems
Published
2011-06
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
1-25
ISSN
  • 2158-656X (ISSN-L)
  • 2158-6578
OpenAlex
W2037881738
Cited by
1,185
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 273 · 2025: 182 · 2024: 147 · 2023: 131 · 2022: 110 · 2021: 95 · 2020: 74 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 4
FWCI
37.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
Keywords
trust in technology, interpersonal trust, trust measurement, construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, nomological network, technology adoption, information systems

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review