Who do you trust: Peers or Technology? A conjoint analysis about computational reputation mechanisms
Open accessAbstract
Peer-to-peer sharing platforms are taking over an increasingly important role in the platform economy due to their sustainable business model. By sharing private goods and services, the challenge arises to build trust between peers online mostly without any kind of physical presence. Peer rating has been proven as an important mechanism. In this paper, we explore the concept called Trust Score, a computational rating mechanism adopted from car telematics, which can play a similar role in carsharing. For this purpose, we conducted a conjoint analysis where 77 car owners chose between fictitious user profiles. Our results show that in our experiment the telemetric-based score slightly outperforms the peer rating in the decision process, while the participants perceived the peer rating more helpful in retrospect. Further, we discuss potential benefits with regard to existing shortcomings of user rating, but also various concerns that should be considered in concepts like telemetric-based reputation mechanism that supplements existing trust factors such as user ratings.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In P2P carsharing, algorithm-based reputation systems could create added value compared to peer ratings because they are based on objective measures.
“In the context of P2P carsharing, algorithm-based reputation systems could create an added value compared to peer ratings, since they are based on objective measures (Stevens and Bossauer, 2020).”
From Trust-Building in Peer-to-Peer Carsharing: Design Case Study for Algorithm-Based Reputation Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Stevens and Bossauer, 2020
The Trust Score could also counteract users' bias due to their trust attitude towards both User Ratings and algorithm-based scores.
“Furthermore, the Trust Score could also counteract users' bias due to their trust attitude towards both User Ratings and algorithm-based scores (Stevens and Bossauer, 2020).”
From Trust-Building in Peer-to-Peer Carsharing: Design Case Study for Algorithm-Based Reputation Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Stevens and Bossauer, 2020
The possibility of weighting preferences within scoring parameters and feedback for the implications of different parameter values would support system intelligibility and trust in technology.
“Further, the possibility of weighting preferences within the scoring parameters as well as feedback for the implications of different parameter values would support system intelligibility and therefore also trust in technology Stevens and Bossauer (2020).”
From Trust-Building in Peer-to-Peer Carsharing: Design Case Study for Algorithm-Based Reputation Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Stevens and Bossauer (2020)
Ratings are the current standard for reputation systems in many areas of the sharing economy.
“This representation was chosen because ratings are the current standard for reputation systems in many areas of the sharing economy (Stevens and Bossauer, 2020; Ert et al., 2016; Ye et al., 2009).”
From Trust-Building in Peer-to-Peer Carsharing: Design Case Study for Algorithm-Based Reputation Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Stevens and Bossauer, 2020
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Trust-Building in Peer-to-Peer Carsharing: Design Case Study for Algorithm-Based Reputation Systems
Neifer, T., Bossauer, P., Pakusch, C., Boehm, L., & Lawo, D. (2024) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-022-09461-4 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“Furthermore, the Trust Score could also counteract users’ bias due to their trust attitude towards both User Ratings and algorithm-based scores (Stevens and Bossauer, 2020).”
InfluentialSelf-citation
- Authors
- Stevens, G., & Bossauer, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Siegen (DE)
- Venue
- European Society for Socially Embedded Technologies (EUSSET)
- Publisher
- European Society for Socially Embedded Technologies (EUSSET)
- Published
- 2020
- OpenAlex
- W3036757122
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 0.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Publication Server of Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences (Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences) (submittedVersion)
- Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI)
- European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Sharing Economy and Platforms
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Keywords
- peer-to-peer sharing, trust score, peer ratings, car sharing, telematics, user ratings, trust in online platforms, conjoint analysis, platform economy
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
