FORMALIZED QUALITATIVE MODELING OF ONLINE TRUST: INTRODUCTION OF THE METHOD AND A DETAILED EXAMPLE

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorVeselý, Štěpán
dc.contributor.authorDohnal, Mirko
dc.contributor.otherEkonomická fakultacs
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-29T07:54:25Z
dc.date.available2022-07-29T07:54:25Z
dc.description.abstractThe paper presents a simple qualitative model of online trust in the context of e-commerce. Qualitative models use just three values: Positive/Increasing, Zero/Constant and Negative/ Decreasing. Such quantifi ers of trends are the least information intensive. Qualitative models can be useful, since models of online trust include such variables as e.g. Perceived website quality and ease of use (SIT) or Company’s positive reputation (REP) that are sometimes diffi cult or costly to quantify. Hence, a signifi cant fraction of available information about online trust is not of numerical nature, e.g. if SIT is decreasing then online trust is decreasing as well. Such equationless relations are studied in this paper. The model has 13 variables and 32 pair-wise interrelations among them. The set of variables and interrelations was established based on discussions with experts and internet users. The model is solved and 23 solutions, i.e. scenarios are obtained (thus, we reduce a vast set of all “imaginable” scenarios concerning online trust to a manageable list of scenarios). All qualitative states, and the fi rst and second qualitative derivatives of all variables are specifi ed for each scenario. Many modifi cations, upgrades and extensions of the present model are easy within the methodological framework introduced in the paper. Qualitative modeling can be seen as one of the uncertainty calculi, such as fuzzy sets and rough sets, that can be helpful e.g. under information shortage (for example when new website is about to be launched and/or when novel, subjective or diffi cult to measure variables are considered). The paper is self-contained and no a priori knowledge of qualitative modeling is required on the reader’s part.en
dc.formattext
dc.format.extent13 strancs
dc.identifier.doi10.15240/tul/001/2016-2-014
dc.identifier.eissn2336-5604
dc.identifier.issn12123609
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/165981
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTechnická Univerzita v Libercics
dc.publisherTechnical university of Liberec, Czech Republicen
dc.publisher.abbreviationTUL
dc.relation.isbasedonBeldad, A., De Jong, M., & Steehouder, M. (2010). How shall I trust the faceless and the intangible? A literature review on the antecedents of online trust. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 857-869. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2010.03.013.
dc.relation.isbasedonBenaroch, M., & Dhar, V. (1995). Controlling the complexity of investment decisions using qualitative reasoning techniques. Decision Support Systems, 15(2), 115-131. doi:10.1016/0167-9236(94)00031-M.
dc.relation.isbasedonBourseau, P., Bousson, K., Dague, P., Dormoy, J.L., Evrard, J.M., Guerrin, F., Leyval, L., Lhomme, O., Lucas, B., Missier, A., Montmain, J., Piera, N., Rakoto-Ravalontsalama, N., Steyer, J.P., Tomasena, M., Trave- Massuyes, L., Vescovi, M., Xanthakis, S., & Yannou, B. (1995). Qualitative reasoning: A survey of techniques and applications. AI Communications, 8(3-4), 119-192. doi:10.3233/ AIC-1995-83-401.
dc.relation.isbasedonBradach, J.L., & Eccles, R.G. (1989). Price, authority, and trust: From ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review of Sociology, 15, 97-118. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.15.080189.000525.
dc.relation.isbasedonCasalo, L., Flavian, C., & Guinaliu, M. (2008). The role of perceived usability, reputation, satisfaction and consumer familiarity on the website loyalty formation process. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 325-345. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.017.
dc.relation.isbasedonChakraborty, C., & Chakraborty, D. (2007). Fuzzy rule base for consumer trustworthiness in Internet marketing: An interactive fuzzy rule classifi cation approach. Intelligent Data Analysis, 11(4), 339-353. doi:10.1016/j. dss.2003.12.005.
dc.relation.isbasedonChau, P.Y.K., Hu, P.J.-H., Lee, B.L.P., & Au, A.K.K. (2007). Examining customers’ trust in online vendors and their dropout decisions: An empirical study. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 6(2), 171-182. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2006.11.008.
dc.relation.isbasedonCorbitt, B.J., Thanasankit, T., & Yi, H. (2003). Trust and e-commerce: A study of consumer perceptions. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 2(3), 203-215. doi:10.1016/ S1567-4223(03)00024-3.
dc.relation.isbasedonCuric, A., Kern, T., & Rajkovic, V. (2008). A qualitative model for road investment appraisal. Transport Policy, 15(4), 225-231. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2008.05.003.
dc.relation.isbasedonCyr, D., Hassanein, K., Head, M., & Ivanov, A. (2007). The role of social presence in establishing loyalty in e-Service environments. Interacting with Computers, 19(1), 43-56. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2006.07.010.
dc.relation.isbasedonDe Jong, H. (2004). Qualitative simulation and related approaches for the analysis of dynamic systems. Knowledge Engineering Review, 19(2), 93-132. doi:10.1017/S0269888904000177.
dc.relation.isbasedonDelina, R., & Dráb, R. (2010). Socioekonomické aspekty budovania dôvery na elektro nických obchodných platformách. E&M Ekono mie a Management, 13(4), 110-122.
dc.relation.isbasedonDohnal, M. (1991). A methodology for common-sense model development. Computers in Industry, 16(2), 141-158. doi:10.1016/0166- 3615(91)90086-O.
dc.relation.isbasedonDubois, D., & Prade, H. (1991). Fuzzy sets in approximate reasoning, part 1: Inference with possibility distributions. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 40(1), 143-202. doi:10.1016/0165- 0114(91)90050-Z.
dc.relation.isbasedonFlavian, C., Guinaliu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management, 43(1), 1-14. doi:10.1016/j.im.2005.01.002.
dc.relation.isbasedonGefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: The role of familiarity and trust. Omega, 28(6), 725-737. doi:10.1016/S0305-0483(00)00021-9.
dc.relation.isbasedonGefen, D., & Straub, D.W. (2004). Consumer trust in B2C e-commerce and the importance of social presence: Experiments in e-products and e-services. Omega, 32(6), 407- 424. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2004.01.006.
dc.relation.isbasedonGrabner-Kraeuter, S. (2002). The role of consumers’ trust in online-shopping. Journal of Business Ethics, 39(1-2), 43-50. doi:10.1023/A:1016323815802.
dc.relation.isbasedonGrabner-Krauter, S., & Kaluscha, E.A. (2003). Empirical research in on-line trust: A review and critical assessment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(6), 783-812. doi:10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00043-0.
dc.relation.isbasedonHassanein, K., & Head, M. (2007). Manipulating perceived social presence through the web interface and its impact on attitude towards online shopping. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(8), 689-708. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.11.018.
dc.relation.isbasedonHinkkanen, A., Lang, K.R., & Whinston, A.B. (2003). A set-theoretical foundation of qualitative reasoning and its application to the modeling of economics and business management problems. Information Systems Frontiers, 5(4), 379-399. doi:10.1023/B:ISFI.0000005652.72048.4d.
dc.relation.isbasedonHoffman, D.L., Novak, T.P., & Peralta, M. (1999). Building consumer trust online. Communications of the ACM, 42(4), 80-85. doi:10.1145/299157.299175.
dc.relation.isbasedonHong, I.B., & Cho, H. (2011). The impact of consumer trust on attitudinal loyalty and purchase intentions in B2C e-marketplaces: Intermediary trust vs. seller trust. International Journal of Information Management, 31(5), 469-479. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.02.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonHub, M., & Zatloukal, M. (2009). Towards establishing a score of usability evaluation. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 12(2), 156-159.
dc.relation.isbasedonJahn, J. (2004). Vector optimization: Theory, applications, and extensions. Berlin – Heidelberg: Springer.
dc.relation.isbasedonKim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L., & Rao, H.R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544-564. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonKim, H.W., Xu, Y.J., & Gupta, S. (2012). Which is more important in Internet shopping, perceived price or trust? Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(3), 241-252. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2011.06.003.
dc.relation.isbasedonKim, S., & Park, H. (2013). Effects of various characteristics of social commerce (s-commerce) on consumers’ trust and trust performance. International Journal of Information Management, 33(2), 318-332. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.11.006.
dc.relation.isbasedonKocmanová, A., Dohnal, M., & Meluzín, T. (2011). Qualitative equationless models as simple integrators of vague sustainability knowledge items. Transformations in Business & Economics, 11(3), 187-196.
dc.relation.isbasedonKonečný, J., Vícha, T., & Dohnal, M. (2010). Qualitative phase portrait of modifi ed Black-Scholes model. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(5), 3823-3826. doi:10.1016/j. eswa.2009.11.037.
dc.relation.isbasedonKoehn, D. (2003). The nature of and conditions for online trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(1-2), 3-19. doi:10.1023/A:1022950813386.
dc.relation.isbasedonKuipers, B. (1989). Qualitative reasoning: Modeling and simulation with incomplete knowledge. Automatica, 25(4), 571-585. doi:10.1016/0005-1098(89)90099-X.
dc.relation.isbasedonLacohee, H., Phippen, A.D., & Furnell, S.M. (2006). Risk and restitution: Assessing how users establish online trust. Computers & Security, 25(7), 486-493. doi:10.1016/j. cose.2006.09.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonLi, W., Liu, J., Wang, H., Calzada, A., Rodriguez, R.M., & Martinez, L. (2012). A qualitative decision making model based on belief linguistic rule based inference methodology. International Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge- Based Systems, 20(SI), 105-118. doi:10.1142/ S0218488512400089.
dc.relation.isbasedonLi, Y.-M., Kao, C.-P., & Trepps: (2009). A trust-based recommender system for peer production services. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 3263-3277. doi:10.1016/j. eswa.2008.01.078.
dc.relation.isbasedonLiao, C., Palvia, P., & Lin, H.-N. (2006). The roles of habit and web site quality in e-commerce. International Journal of Information Management, 26(6), 469-483. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2006.09.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonMcKnight, D.H., & Chervany, N.L. (2001). What trust means in e-commerce customer relationships: An interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(2), 35-59. doi:10.1080/1086441 5.2001.11044235.
dc.relation.isbasedonMcKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334-359. doi:10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81.
dc.relation.isbasedonMetzger, M.J. (2006). Effects of site, vendor, and consumer characteristics on web site trust and disclosure. Communication Research, 33(3), 155-179. doi:10.1177/0093650206287076.
dc.relation.isbasedonPark, J., Gunn, F., & Han, S.-L. (2012). Multidimensional trust building in e-retailing: Cross-cultural differences in trust formation and implications for perceived risk. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(3), 304-312.
dc.relation.isbasedonParsons, S., & Dohnal, M. (1995). The qualitative and semiqualitative analysis of environmental problems. Environmental Software, 10(2), 75-85.
dc.relation.isbasedonPawlak, Z. (1982). Rough sets. Journal of Computer & Information Sciences, 11(5), 341-356. doi:10.1007/BF01001956.
dc.relation.isbasedonPrice, C.J., Trave-Massuyes, L., Milne, R., Ironi, L., Forbus, K., Bredeweg, B., Lee, M.H., Struss, P., Snooke, N., Lucas, P., Cavazza, M., & Coghill, G.M. (2006). Qualitative futures. Knowledge Engineering Review, 21(4), 317- 334. doi:10.1017/S026988890600097X.
dc.relation.isbasedonRaiman, O. (1991). Order of magnitude reasoning. Artifi cial Intelligence, 51(1-3), 11-38. doi:10.1016/0004-3702(91)90107-U.
dc.relation.isbasedonRežňáková, M., Wouters, H., Dohnal, M., & Brož, Z. (2012). Equationless qualitative models of science parks: Part II, optimisation by time sequences of scenarios. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 8(3), 295-306. doi:10.1504/IJTIP.2012.048575.
dc.relation.isbasedonShankar, V., Urban, G.L., & Sultan, F. (2002). Online trust: A stakeholder perspective, concepts, implications, and future directions. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3-4), 325-344. doi:10.1016/S0963-8687(02)00022-7.
dc.relation.isbasedonSong, S.S., Hwang, K., Zhou, R.F., & Kwok, Y.K. (2005). Trusted P2P transactions with fuzzy reputation aggregation. IEEE Internet Computing, 9(6), 24-34. doi:10.1109/ MIC.2005.136.
dc.relation.isbasedonSrinivasan, S.S., Anderson, R., & Ponnavolu, K. (2002). Customer loyalty in e-commerce: An exploration of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Retailing, 78(1), 41-50.
dc.relation.isbasedonTrave-Massuyes, L., Ironi, L., & Dague, P. (2004). Mathematical foundations of qualitative reasoning. AI Magazine, 24(4), 91-106. doi:10.1609/aimag.v24i4.1733.
dc.relation.isbasedonUtz, S., Kerhof, P., & Van Den Bos, J. (2012). Consumers rule: How consumer reviews infl uence perceived trustworthiness of online stores. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(1), 49-58. doi:10.1016/j. elerap.2011.07.010.
dc.relation.isbasedonVan Der Heijden, H., Verhagen, T., & Creemers, M. (2003). Understanding online purchase intentions: Contributions from technology and trust perspectives. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 41-48. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000445.
dc.relation.isbasedonVícha, T., & Dohnal, M. (2008a). Qualitative feature extractions of chaotic systems. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 38(2), 364-373. doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2008.01.008.
dc.relation.isbasedonVícha, T., & Dohnal, M. (2008b). Qualitative identifi cation of chaotic systems behaviours. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 38(1), 70-78. doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2008.01.027.
dc.relation.isbasedonYoon, S.J. (2002). The antecedents and consequences of trust in online-purchase decisions. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16(2), 47-63. doi:10.1002/dir.10008.
dc.relation.isbasedonZadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. doi:10.1016/S0019- 9958(65)90241-X.
dc.relation.isbasedonZhang, H. (2004). Trust-promoting seals in electronic markets: Impact on online shopping decisions. Journal of Information Technology Theory & Application, 6(4), 29-40. doi:10.1300/ J057v09n01_13
dc.relation.ispartofEkonomie a Managementcs
dc.relation.ispartofEconomics and Managementen
dc.rightsCC BY-NC
dc.subjecttrusten
dc.subjectonlineen
dc.subjecte-commerceen
dc.subjectinterneten
dc.subjectqualitative modelen
dc.subjectmultidimensionalen
dc.subjectformalizeden
dc.subjectmethodologyen
dc.subject.classificationC65
dc.subject.classificationD80
dc.subject.classificationL81
dc.subject.classificationM31
dc.titleFORMALIZED QUALITATIVE MODELING OF ONLINE TRUST: INTRODUCTION OF THE METHOD AND A DETAILED EXAMPLEen
dc.typeArticleen
local.accessopen
local.citation.epage213
local.citation.spage201
local.facultyFaculty of Economics
local.fulltextyes
local.relation.abbreviationE+Mcs
local.relation.abbreviationE&Men
local.relation.issue2
local.relation.volume19
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EM_2_2016_14.pdf
Size:
963.18 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
článek
Download
Collections
Číslo 2