This article contends that achieving trust and confidence in Internet systems is dependent on enhancing public perceptions that those who develop and manage Internet technologies are honest, capable, competent, and accountable. Drawing upon recent studies of the Internet and on decision-support technologies, first outlined are the principal dimensions of trust and confidence in Cybersystems, including the growing distance between citizens and technology institutions, the credibility of information disseminated by Cybersystems, and the potential risks attendant upon Cybersystem use. It is posited that trust and confidence are dependent on the ability of the Internet and other computer-based communication systems to satisfy salient user needs. Five needs are paramount: real time information availability; accurate and precise data and information; usability and usefulness of information platforms; ease-of-use of communication systems; and access and accountability to users of Internet developers and data providers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barber, B.R. (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
2.
Benbasat, I. and R.N. Taylor (1982). “Behavioral Aspects of Information Processing for the Design of Management Information Systems.”IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, (SMC-12) (4): 439-450.
3.
Chess, C.A. and B.J. Hance (1994). Communicating with the Public: Ten Questions Environmental Managers Should Ask. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Environmental Communication, State University of New Jersey, Rutgers.
4.
Colglazier, E.W. (1991). “Scientific Uncertainties, Public Policy and Global Warming: How Sure is Sure Enough.”Policy Studies Journal, 19 (2): 61-72.
5.
Covello, V.T. (1992). “Trust and Credibility in Risk Communication.”Health and Environment Digest, (April): 1-3.
6.
Covello, V. , E. Donovan, and J.E. Slavick (1990). Community Outreach. Washington, DC: Chemical Manufacturers Association.
7.
Creighton, J.L. (1997). “Communicating With the Public About Risk.” In Involving Citizens in Community Decision Making: A Guidebook. Washington, DC: Program for Community Problem Solving, a Division of the National Civic League.
8.
Dobson, J.E. (1988). “Geographic Information Systems for Emergency Management.” In Strategies and Systems for Disaster Survival: The Symposium on Information Technology and Emergency Management, pp. 32-34: Gatlinburg, TN, May 4-6. Rockville, MD: Research Alternatives, Inc.
9.
Drell, D.W. , F.B. Metting, Jr., and L.D. Wuy (1996). Summary Proceedings of a Workshop on Bioremediation and its Societal Implications and Concerns. Germantown, MD: Natural and Accelerated Bioremediation Research Program, Office of Energy Research, US Department of Energy.
10.
Dutton, W.H. , P.L. Sweet and E.M. Rogers (1989). “Socioeconomic Status and the Early Diffusion of Personal Computing in the United States.”Social Science Computer Review, 7 (3): 259-272.
11.
Felleman, J. (1998). “Internet Facilitated Open Modeling: A Critical Policy Framework.” Paper presented at the National Conference on Environmental Decision Making, Knoxville, TN, (May).
12.
Flynn, J. , R.E. Kasperson, H. Kunreuther, and P. Slovic (1997). “Overcoming Tunnel Vision: Redirecting the U.S. High-Level Nuclear Waste Program.”Environment, 39 (3): 6-11; 25-30.
13.
Golding, P. (1997). “Division and Contradiction in the Global Information Infrastructure.”Monthly Review, 48 (3): 70-85.
14.
Green, K.M. (1988). “So You Want a GIS: Have You Considered These Management and Technical Issues?” In Piecing the Puzzle Together (Conference on Integrated Data for Decision-making, May 27-29, 1987) (L.J. Allison and R.J. Olson, eds), pp. 97-103. Washington, DC: US National Commission for CODATA.
15.
Harden, B. (1996). “Half-Lives: Government, Poison, Lies and the Splitting of Atomic America.”Washington Post Magazine, 5May: 12-19; 26-29.
16.
Hill, K.A. and J.E. Hughes (1998). Cyberpolitics: Citizen Activism in the Age of the Internet. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
17.
Hirschkop, K. (1997). “Democracy and New Technologies.”Monthly Review, 48 (3): 86-93.
18.
Huggins, R. (1998). “The Year 2000 Hazard: A Hazards Research and Applications Bonanza.”Natural Hazards Observer, XXIII (2): 1-3.
19.
Information Infrastructure Task Force (1993). The National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action. Washington, DC: Information Infrastructure Task Force.
20.
Jasanoff, S. (1994). “Procedural Choices in Regulatory Science.”Risk: Health, Safety, and Environment, 4: 143.
21.
Kantrowitz, A. (1993). “Elitism vs. Checks and Balances in Communicating Risk Information to the Public.”Risk: Health, Safety, and Environment, 4: 101.
22.
Kasperson, R.E. (1986). “Six Propositions on Public Participation and Their Relevance for Risk Communication.”Risk Analysis, 6: 275-281.
23.
Katz, D. and R.L. Kahn (1974). The Social Psychology of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
24.
Keohane, R.O. and J.S. Nye, Jr. (1998). “Power and Interdependence in the Information Age.”Foreign Affairs, 77 (5): 81-94.
25.
Kraft, M.E. , et al. (1987). “Politics, Planning, and Technological Risk: State and Citizen Participation in Nuclear Waste Management.” Paper presented at the American Political Science Association meeting.
26.
Lewis, J.D. and A. Weigert (1985). “Trust as a Social Reality.”Social Forces, 63: 967-985.
27.
Linstone, H.A. (1984). Multiple Perspectives for Decision-Making; Bridging the Gap Between Analysis and Action. New York: Elsevier Publications.
28.
Mansbridge, J.J. (1983). Beyond Adversary Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
McClellan, R. (1995). “Current Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Health and Environment and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.”Committee on Commerce, US House of Representatives, 9 November.
30.
McGarity, T.O. (1990). “Public Participation in Risk Regulation.”Risk: Health, Safety, and Environment, 1: 103.
31.
Miller, S.E. (1996). Civilizing Cyberspace: Policy, Power, and the Information Superhighway, (T.E. Stone, ed.). New York: CM Press.
32.
National Academy of Sciences . (1997). “More than Screen Deep: Toward Every Citizen Interfaces to the National Information Infrastructure.”Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Available: http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/enter32.cgi?CO.html.
33.
Nelkin, D. (1981). “Some Social and Political Dimensions of Nuclear Power: Examples from Three Mile Island.”American Political Science Review, 75: 132-142.
34.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
Ostrom, E. , L. Schroeder, and S. Wynne (1993). Institutional Incentives and Sustainable Development: Infrastructure Policies in Perspective. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
36.
Parker, H.D. and J.E. Dobson, (1990). “GIS World Survey.”GIS World, July: 1-16.
37.
Perrow, C. (1984). Normal Accidents: Living With High-Risk Technologies. New York: Basic Books.
38.
President’s Council on Sustainable Development (1996). Final Report. Washington, DC: Office of the President.
39.
Rabe, B.G. (1994). Beyond NIMBY: Hazardous Waste Siting in Canada and the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
40.
Resnick, P. and H.R. Varian (1997). “Introduction to Recommender Systems.”Communications of the ACM, 40 (3): 56-58.
41.
Rosenbaum W.A. (1991). Environmental Politics and Policy, 2nd edition. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc.
42.
Saaty, T.L. (1982). Decision-making for Leaders: The Analytical Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
43.
Schneider, F.B. (1998). “Trust in Cyberspace.” Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
44.
Simon, H.A. (1979). “Rational Decision-Making in Business Organizations.”American Economic Review, 69 (4): 493-513.
45.
Simon, H.A. (1983). Reason in Human Affairs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
46.
Slovic, P. (1991). “Perceived Risk, Stigma, and Economic Impacts of a High-level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada.”Risk Analysis, 11: 683-696.
47.
Slovic, P. (1997). “Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk-Assessment Battlefield.” In Psychological Perspectives to Environment and Ethics in Management (M. Bazerman, D. Messick, A. Tenbrunsel, and K. Wade-Benzoni, eds.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
48.
Steering Committee on Research Opportunities Related to Economic and Social Impacts of Computing and Communications (1998). Fostering Research on the Economic and Social Impacts of Information Technology: Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
49.
Steinbruner, J. (1974). The Cybernetic Theory of Decision: New Dimensions of Political Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
50.
Sterling, B. (1992). The Hacker Crackdown: Law and Disorder on the Electronic Frontier. New York: Bantam Books.
51.
Tinker, T.L. (1997). “Putting Risk Communication Policy Into Practice: A Federal Perspective.”Risk Policy Report, 4 (12): 33-35.
52.
Trauth, J.M. (1994). “A Case Study of Health Risk Communication: What the Public Wants and What it Gets.”Risk: Health, Safety, and the Environment, 5: 49.
53.
Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1974). “Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.”Science, 185: 1124-1131.
54.
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1989). Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund,Volume II: Environmental Evaluation Manual. EPA/540/1-89/001. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
55.
Wilhelm, A.G. (1997). “A Resource Model of Computer-Mediated Political Life.”Policy Studies Journal, 25 (4): 519-534.
56.
Young, J.R. (1998). “Debate Flares Over Group that Hopes to Oversee the Internet.”The Chronicle of Higher Education, 27November: A21-A22.
