Abstract
We contest a reductive view of trust, quite diffused in economics, and in studies influenced by the Game-Theory framework: the idea that trust has necessarily to do with contexts requiring “reciprocation”; or that trust is trust in the other’s reciprocation. A multi-layer cognitive model of trust will be proposed. Trust is not conceived only as an attitude towards the other, implying different kinds of beliefs (evaluations, expectations, beliefs on the other”s motives, etc.), but also as a willingness to rely on others that makes us dependent and vulnerable to them, as well as a concrete act of reliance based on this. Not necessarily we trust people because they will be willing to reciprocate; and we do not necessarily reciprocate for reciprocating. Trust (even “genuine” trust) is based on a variety of motivations ascribed to others and makes prevail the adoption of our needs and goals: from “altruism” to “self-interest”, from reciprocation to norms or to affective reasons.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
“Peace is not the absence of war; it is a virtue, a state of soul. It is a disposition to benevolence, to trust, to justice” (Baruch Spinoza).
The anti-social corresponding bilateral structure is just: hostility (the disposition not to help or even to do harm) confronting distrust and diffidence.
Even in asynchronous “exchanges”, even if X acts before Y, and Y acts after X’s “help”, Y is trusting X. Not necessarily at the very moment of doing his own share, but before, at the very moment of accepting X’s help, and relying on it. Of course, in asynchronous “exchanges” X’s trust in Y is broader and more risky: she has additionally to believe (before concrete evidences) that Y will do the expected action, while Y has some evidence of this (but perhaps deceptive).
In other words here we have a double and symmetric structure (at least in X mind) of goal-adoption and reliance (see later).
Notice that X might also adopt Y’s goals, while expecting his “cooperation”, not as a means for this. X might for example be an anticipatory reciprocator since she knows that Y is doing an act in her favor, she wants to reciprocate and—in advance—she does something for Y.
Someone would prefer another term, say “confidence”, but this is just a (reasonable) technical convention, not the real use and meaning of such words.
References
Baier A (1986) Trust and antitrust. Ethics 96:231–260
Barber B (1983) The logic and limits of trust. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick
Camerer C (1988) Gifts as economic signals and social symbols. Am J Sociol 94:S180
Castelfranchi C (1998) Modeling social action for AI agents. Artif Intell 103:157–182
Castelfranchi C (2004) Silent agents. From observation to tacit communication. Modeling other agents from observations: MOO 2004—WS at the International joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems, July 19, 2004 URL: http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/~galk/moo2004/
Castelfranchi C, Falcone R (1998) Principles of trust for MAS: cognitive anatomy, social importance, and quantification. In: Proceedings of the international conference on multi-agent systems (ICMAS”98), Paris, pp 72–79
Castelfranchi C, Falcone R (2000) Trust is much more than subjective probability: mental components and sources of trust. 32nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences—Track on Software agents, Maui, Hawaii, Electronic proceedings
Castelfranchi C, Falcone R (2008) Trust theory. Wiley, London (in press)
Castelfranchi C, Falcone R, Marzo F (2006) Being trusted in a social network: trust as relational capital. In: Proceedings of Trust 2006-4th international conference on trust management, Pisa, pp 16–26
Castelfranchi C, Lorini E (2003) Cognitive anatomy and functions of expectations. Proceedings of IJCAI”03 workshop on cognitive modeling of agents and multi-agent interactions. Acapulco
Cialdini RB (2001) Influence: science and practice, 4th edn. Allyn & Bacon, Boston
Conte R, Castelfranchi C (1995) Cognitive and social action. UCL Press, London
Deutsch M (1973) The resolution of conflict. Yale University Press, New Haven and London
Falcone R, Castelfranchi C (2001) The socio-cognitive dynamics of trust: does trust create trust? In: Falcone R, Singh M, Tan YH (eds) Trust in cyber-societies. Integrating the human and artificial perspectives. Springer, LNAI 2246, Heidelberg, pp 55–72
Gambetta D (ed) (1988) Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations. Basil Blackwell, New York
Hardin R (2002) Trust and trustworthiness. Russel Sage Foundation, New York
Hart K (1988) Kinship, contract and trust: the economic organization of migrants in an African city slum. In: Gambetta D (ed) Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations. Basil Blackwell, New York
Holton R (1994) Deciding to trust, coming to believe. Austr J Philos 72(1):63–76
Jones AJ (2002) On the concept of trust decision. Support Syst 33(3):225–232. Special issue: Formal modeling and electronic commerce
Jones K (1996) Trust as an affective attitude. Ethics 107:4–25
Jones K (2001) Trust: philosophical aspects. In: Smelser N, Bates P (eds) International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 15917–15922
Kurzban R (2003) Biological foundation of reciprocity. In: Omstrom E, Walker J (eds) Trust, reciprocity: interdisciplinary lessons from experimental research. Sage, New York, pp 105–127
Luhmann N (1979) Trust and power. Wiley, New York
Luhmann N (1990) Familiarity, confidence, trust: problems and alternatives. In: Gambetta D (ed) Trust, Chap. 6. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp 94–107
Mashima R, Yamagishi T, Macy M (2004) Trust and cooperation: a comparison between Americans and Japanese about in-group preference and trust behavior. Jpn J Psychol 75:308–315
Miceli M, Castelfranchi C (2002) The mind and the future: the (negative) power of expectations. Theory Psychol 12(3):335–366
Pelligra V (2005) Under trusting eyes: the responsive nature of trust. In: Sugden R, Gui B (eds) Economics and sociality: accounting for the interpersonal relations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Pelligra V (2006) Trust responsiveness: on the dynamics of fiduciary interactions. Working Paper CRENoS No 15
Rousseau DM, Sitkin S, Burt RS, Camerer C (1998) Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust. Acad Manage Rev 23(3):393–404
Schelling TC (1960) The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Smith A (1776) An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Edited by E Cannan E, 1904, Methuen & Co, London
Williamson OE (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism: firms, markets, relational contracting. The Free Press, New York
Williamson OE (1993) Calculativeness, trust, and economic organization. J Law Econ 36(April):453–486
Yamagishi T (2003) Cross-societal experimentation on trust: a comparison of the United States and Japan. In: Omstrom E, Walker J (eds) Trust, reciprocity: interdisciplinary lessons from experimental research, Sage, New York, pp 352–370
Acknowledgments
This research has been carried out within the ESF Project “The Social and Mental Dynamics of Cooperation”, and the “For Trust” Project, Agence Nationale de la Recherche, France.
I would like to thank Rino Falcone, co-author of our theory of trust; Luca Tummolini and Francesca Marzo for our discussions on cognition and economics, on reciprocity, etc.; Vittorio Pelligra for an interesting debate; and an anonymous reviewer of this journal for precious editing remarks, as well as Federica Mattei for her help.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Castelfranchi, C. Trust and reciprocity: misunderstandings. Int. Rev. Econ. 55, 45–63 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-008-0041-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-008-0041-x