The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Survey on Trust Modeling
Open accessAbstract
The concept of trust and/or trust management has received considerable attention in engineering research communities as trust is perceived as the basis for decision making in many contexts and the motivation for maintaining long-term relationships based on cooperation and collaboration. Even if substantial research effort has been dedicated to addressing trust-based mechanisms or trust metrics (or computation) in diverse contexts, prior work has not clearly solved the issue of how to model and quantify trust with sufficient detail and context-based adequateness. The issue of trust quantification has become more complicated as we have the need to derive trust from complex, composite networks that may involve four distinct layers of communication protocols, information exchange, social interactions, and cognitive motivations. In addition, the diverse application domains require different aspects of trust for decision making such as emotional, logical, and relational trust. This survey aims to outline the foundations of trust models for applications in these contexts in terms of the concept of trust, trust assessment, trust constructs, trust scales, trust properties, trust formulation, and applications of trust. We discuss how different components of trust can be mapped to different layers of a complex, composite network; applicability of trust metrics and models; research challenges; and future work directions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Putnam, R. (2000) · doi:10.1145/358916.361990 · Cited by 17,114
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification
Freeman, L. C. (1978) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · Cited by 17,062
The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism
Trivers, R. L. (1971) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/406755 · Cited by 11,010
17. A Value for n-Person Games
Shapley, L. S. (1953) · Contributions to the Theory of Games (AM-28), Volume II · doi:10.1515/9781400881970-018 · Cited by 6,950
Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance
Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392 · Cited by 6,605 · cited 2×
“…Attitude that one agent will achieve another agent’s goal in a situation where imperfect knowledge is given with uncertainty and vulnerability Lee et al. [2006] Computing & Networking Estimated subjective probability that an entity exhibits reliable behavior for particular operation(s) under…”
BackgroundLewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2578601 · Cited by 4,163
Rempel, J. K., Holmes, J. G., & Zanna, M. P. (1985) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.95 · Cited by 3,146 · cited 1×
“Muir [1994] elaborates the concept of trust based on expectation [Barber 1983] and experience [Rempel et al. 1985].”
BackgroundPrice, Authority, and Trust: From Ideal Types to Plural Forms
Bradach, J. L., & Eccles, R. G. (1989) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.so.15.080189.000525 · Cited by 1,990
Feeling and Believing: The Influence of Emotion on Trust.
Dunn, J. R., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2005) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.5.736 · Cited by 1,301
MUIR, B. M., & MORAY, N. (1996) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139608964474 · Cited by 993
MUIR, B. M. (1994) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139408964957 · Cited by 873
Hilligoss, B., & Rieh, S. Y. (2008) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2007.10.001 · Cited by 611
Trust, Untrust, Distrust and Mistrust – An Exploration of the Dark(er) Side
Marsh, S., & Dibben, M. R. (2005) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/11429760_2 · Cited by 188
Can you ever trust a wiki?: impacting perceived trustworthiness in wikipedia
Kittur, A., Suh, B., & Chi, E. H. (2008) · Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1145/1460563.1460639 · Cited by 122
Cited by
Trusting Intelligent Machines: Deepening Trust Within Socio-Technical Systems
Andras, P., Esterle, L., Guckert, M., Han, T. A., Lewis, P. R., Milanovic, K., Payne, T., Perret, C., Pitt, J., Powers, S. T., et al. (2018) · IEEE Technology and Society Magazine · doi:10.1109/mts.2018.2876107 · Cited by 153
A Review on Human–Machine Trust Evaluation: Human-Centric and Machine-Centric Perspectives
Gebru, B., Zeleke, L., Blankson, D., Nabil, M., Nateghi, S., Homaifar, A., & Tunstel, E. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems · doi:10.1109/thms.2022.3144956 · Cited by 101
Rechkemmer, A., & Yin, M. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3501967 · Cited by 97
Toward the dynamic relationship between AI transparency and trust in AI: A case study on ChatGPT
Lee, C., & Cha, K. (2025) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2405266 · Cited by 53
Persuading Patients Using Rhetoric to Improve Artificial Intelligence Adoption: Experimental Study
Sebastian, G., George, A., & Jackson Jr, G. (2023) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/41430 · Cited by 48
“Trust, a psychological construct that encompasses an emotional and a logical aspect [47], can influence a user’s perception of using an AI product.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Cho, J.-H., Chan, K., & Adali, S.
- Venue
- ACM Computing Surveys
- Published
- 2015-10-12
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1-40
- ISSN
- 0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7341
- OpenAlex
- W2135363691
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 59.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
