Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An enhanced e-commerce trust model for community based centralized systems

  • Published:
Electronic Commerce Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conventional trust models cannot simultaneously fulfill three major requirements of community based centralized e-commerce systems having a large number of members and economic risk. First, a buyer dealing with a new seller should be able to consult other buyers’ experiences with that seller to make a better decision. Also, a seller with a good reputation should not abuse it by conducting fraudulent transactions. Finally, a buyer with good experience with a seller, even one with a bad reputation, should be able to continue to deal with that seller. This paper introduces a trust-scoring model (Enhanced E-Commerce Trust Model or E2CTM) to address the above requirements. In E2CTM, a trustor uses personal experience with a trustee and input from other trustors about that trustee. To explore the capability of E2CTM, an online electronic auction shopping system was developed to compare its performance with a conventional trust model used by most electronic shopping systems that uses overall gain and loss of all buyers in simulated auctions as evaluation criteria. The results show the advantage of E2CTM, specifically, in terms of overall performance. The improvement is more significant when there is low percentage of fraudulent transactions in the system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abdul-Rahman, A., & Hailes, S. (2000). Supporting trust in virtual communities. In Proceedings of the Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Maui, Hawaii, 4–7 January.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ba, S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2002). Evidence of the effect of trust building technology in electronic markets: price premiums and buyer behavior. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 26(3), 243–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bhattacherjee, A. (2002). Individual trust in online firms: scale development and initial test. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(1), 211–241.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boyd, J. (2002). In community we trust: online security communication at eBay. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(3).

  5. Capra, L. (2004). Engineering human trust in mobile system collaborations. In Proceedings of 12th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium foundation of software engineering (pp. 107–116).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Carter, J., Bitting, E., & Ghorbani, A. (2002). Reputation formalization for an information-sharing multi-agent system. Computational Intelligence, 18(2), 515–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dellarocas, C. (2003). The digitization of word-of-mouth: promise and challenges of online reputation systems. Management Science, 49, 1407–1424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Esfandiari, B., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2001). On how agents make friends: mechanisms for trust acquisition. In Proceedings of the fourth workshop on deception, fraud and trust in agent societies, Montreal, Canada (pp. 27–34).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2003). Managing user trust in B2C e-services. E-Service Journal, 2(2), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Grandison, T., & Sloman, M. (2000). A survey of trust in internet applications. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 3(4), 2–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gregg, D. G., & Walczak, S. (2010). The relationship between website quality, trust and price premiums at online auctions. Electronic Commerce Research, 10(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Josang, A. (2007). Trust and reputation systems. In Lecture notes in computer science: Vol. 4677. Foundations of security analysis and design IV, Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Jøsang, A., Ismail, R., & Boyd, C. (2007). A survey of trust and reputation systems for online service provision. Decision Support Systems, 43(2), 618–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jøsang, A., & Lo Presti, S. (2004). Analysing the relationship between risk and trust. In T. Dimitrakos (Ed.), Proceedings of the second international conference on trust management (iTrust), Oxford, March.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jøsang, A. (1996). The right type of trust for distributed systems. In C. Meadows (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1996 new security paradigms workshop. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Karlins, M., & Abelson, H. I. (1970). Persuasion, how opinion and attitudes are changed. Crosby Lockwood & Son.

  17. Kerr, R., & Cohen, R. (2010). Treet: the trust and reputation experimentation and evaluation testbed. Electronic Commerce Research, 10(3–4), 271–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Koh, Y. J., & Sundar, S. S. (2010). Effects of specialization in computers, web sites, and web agents on e-commerce trust. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(12), 899–912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu, J., & Issarny, V. (2004). Enhanced reputation mechanism for mobile ad hoc networks. In Trust management: second international conference (iTrust 2004), Oxford, UK, March 29–April 1.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lopes-Nicolas, C., & Molina-Castillo, F. J. (2008). Customer knowledge management and E-commerce: the role of customer perceived risk. International Journal of Information Management, 28(2), 102–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mamdani, E. H., & Assilian, S. (1975). An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 7(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Manchala, D. W. (1998). Trust metrics, models and protocols for electronic commerce transactions. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on distributed computing systems (pp. 312–321). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  23. McKnight, D. H., Kacmar, C. J., & Choudhury, V. (2004). Dispositional trust and distrust distinctions in predicting high and low-risk internet expert advice site perceptions. E-Service Journal, 3(2), 35–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. McKnight, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mejiaa, M., Peñaa, N., Muñozb, J. L., Esparzab, O., & Alzatec, M. A. (2010). A game theoretic trust model for on-line distributed evolution of cooperation in MANETs. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 34(1), 39–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Patton, M. A., & Jøsang, A. (2004). Technologies for trust in electronic commerce. Electronic Commerce Research, 4(1–2), 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pavlou, P. A., & Dimoka, A. (2006). The nature and role of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: implications for trust building, price premiums, and seller differentiation. Information Systems Research, 17(4), 391–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ranaweera, C., Bansal, H., & McDougall, G. (2008). Web site satisfaction and purchase intentions: impact of personality characteristics during initial web site visit. Managing Service Quality, 18(4), 329–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Resnick, P., & Zeckhauser, R. (2002). Trust among strangers in internet transactions: empirical analysis of eBay’s reputation system. In M. R. Baye (Ed.), Advances in applied microeconomics: Vol. 11. The economics of the internet and e-commerce, Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Sabater, J., & Sierra, C. (2002). Social ReGreT, a reputation model based on social relations. ACM SIGecom Exchanges, 3(1), 44–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sabater, J., & Sierra, C. (2002). Reputation and social network analysis in multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the first international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-02), Bologna, Italy (pp. 475–482).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Sabater, J., & Sierra, C. (2001). REGRET: A reputation model for gregarious societies. In Proceedings of the 4th int. workshop on deception, fraud and trust in agent societies, in the 5th international conference on autonomous agents (AGENTS’01), Montreal, Canada (pp. 61–69).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Schillo, M., Funk, P., & Rovatsos, M. (2000). Using trust for detecting deceitful agents in artificial societies. Applied Artificial Intelligence Journal, 14, 825–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sen, S., & Sajja, N. (2002). Robustness of reputation-based trust: booblean case. In Proceedings of the first international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-02), Bologna, Italy (pp. 288–293).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Simon, H. (2009). The crisis and customer behavior: eight quick solutions. Journal of Customer Behaviour , 8(2), 177–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Song, J., & Baker, J. (2007). An integrated model exploring sellers’ strategies in eBay auctions. Electronic Commerce Research, 7(2), 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Swamynathan, G., Almeroth, K. C., & Zhao, B. Y. (2010). The design of a reliable reputation system. Electronic Commerce Research, 10(3–4), 239–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Takagi, T., & Sugeno, M. (1985). Fuzzy identification of systems and its application to modeling and control. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 15(1), 116–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Teacy, W. T. L., Patel, J., Jennings, N. R., & Luck, M. (2006). TRAVOS: trust and reputation in the context of inaccurate information sources. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 12(2), 183–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tsukamoto, Y. (1979). An approach to fuzzy reasoning method. In M. M. Gupta, R. K. Ragade, & R. R. Yager (Eds.), Advances in fuzzy set theory and application (pp. 137–149). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Yen, Y. S. (2010). Can perceived risks affect the relationship of switching costs and customer loyalty in e-commerce? Internet Research, 20(2), 210–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yu, B., & Singh, M. P. (2003). Detecting deception in reputation management. In Proceedings of the 2nd international joint conference on autonomous agents and MultiAgent systems, Melbourne, Australia (pp. 73–80). New York: ACM.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering & Information Technology, Amirkabir University of Technology, 424 Hafez Av., P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran

    Mohammad Amin Morid & Mehdi Shajari

Authors
  1. Mohammad Amin Morid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehdi Shajari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Amin Morid.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Morid, M.A., Shajari, M. An enhanced e-commerce trust model for community based centralized systems. Electron Commer Res 12, 409–427 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-012-9099-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-012-9099-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation