A design space for Trust-enabling Interaction Design

Trust-enablingInteraction Design

Theoretical underpinnings

HCI perspective• How computing and computational artifacts relate to

the human condition.

Trust perspective• Social-technical aspects of trustful relationships

Human Computer Trust• Trust-enabling interactions

Intercept Human-Computer interactions with the dynamic nature of social-trust relationships

key principles

The ongoing cultural shift • The existing ever-widening range of digital artifacts is

transforming our daily lives.

How we relate to technology is• less and less about the… devices; and • more about the… activities.

Information technology context is• becoming pervasive; and

Computing is• becoming ubiquitous

Because...

Trust is...

• a key element in human relations.

With Trust...

• Actions are more decisive.

• Activities proceed more smoothly.

(e.g. Yan, 2010; Mcknight, 1996; Constantine, 2006, Preece, 2004)

(e.g. Coleman, 1988; Weber, 2003; Fukuyama, 1995; Luhmann, 2000; Gambetta, 1998)

Contextual aim

Trust contemplates• Social phenomena• A complex two-way relationship

Trust emerges from• An interpersonal organization• A specific social situation• A specific social context

• Positive experiences• Interactions• Active participation • Cooperative relations

SUPPORT&

SUSTAIN

Multidiciplinary • Multiple interpretations

Research include areas such as…• Sociology (Good, 2000), • Political science (Fukuyama, 1995; Luhmann, 2000); • Economics (Dasgupta, 2000); • Socio-biology (Batenson, 1998); • Cognitive science (Bachrach, 2001); • Computer sciences (McKnight, 2002); and even • Education (Hoy, 2003).

Contextual aim

Trust notions (social science)

Trust notions (Computer science)

Computer science perspectives • Separates the trust concept in 2 distinct domain

definitions:

operational and internal

Contextual aim

Trusting represents• A reinsurance element

Trusting comes associated • With certain properties that help to support users

intended behaviours

Trusting relies on• The identification of trustworthy making qualities

How to determine if a situation is in fact

trustworthy?

By observing the trust warranty signs

Bacharach et. al., 2007

The research contemplates

A need for identify

1. Trust social values (qualities) that underlies people’s trust beliefs

2. The reliability of those trustworthy making qualities

3. How those (trustworthy making qualities) are represented in today’s ongoing cultural shift

Results (associated notions)

Trusting is…• process of believing in others behaviours

Reflects a • risk

While some are more willing to take the risks others don’t

Level of commitment of

both parts

Strong incentives to believe that

determinate person, service or tool is in

fact trustworthy

Human Computer Trust model

Predominant factors

Refections

Trust-enabling interactions systems include qualities like:

• Enables more honest & transparent behaviours• Facilitates the... Prediction of others activities patterns • Enables the perception of others competencies• Creates/supports emphatic relations which, fosters

Social engagement• Diminish group hostility which, increase group

commitment • Foster group motivation & willingness to cooperate

Design spaceA method to evaluate trust-enabling interaction design qualities

UsefulnessArtifact-centered Value-centered

This toolset provides designers lenses to

• Assess the act of design for trust-enable interactions; and

• Evaluate if their design propositions have been reflected in the design outcome.

Critical design

Reflect on values Understand the

design options Evaluate the

design propositions

Example

Thank you!