Academic literature on the topic 'Untrustworthine'

Benchmarking security is hard and, although there are many proposals of security metrics in the literature, no consensual quantitative security metric has been previously proposed. A key difficulty is that security is usually more influenced by what is unknown about a system than by what is known. In this paper, the authors propose the use of an untrustworthiness metric for benchmarking security. This metric, based on the idea of quantifying and exposing the trustworthiness relationship between a system and its owner, represents a powerful alternative to traditional security metrics. As an example, the authors propose a benchmark for Database Management Systems (DBMS) that can be easily used to assess and compare alternative database configurations based on minimum untrustworthiness, which is a low-cost and high-reward trust-based metric. The practical application of the benchmark in four real large database installations shows that untrustworthiness is a powerful metric for administrators to make informed security decisions by taking into account the specifics needs and characteristics of the environment being managed.

Troubadour? mask denotes a figure activated by Nietzsche in order to arrange a quarrel with his own time. Transformative capacities of its untimilyness were examined from the perspective of the contemporary instability of democratic order, recognized by bulgarian political scientist Ivan Krastev as an expression of encreasing crisis of the trust in the democratic order. Unlike Krastev?s thesis, this paper uncovers that the process of absolutization of trust caracterizes a trajectory from religious faith to antidemocratical, slave-like totalitarian submission. Its conclusion claims that maximalized trust leads to a totalitarian subject, who is unevitably dumb, speechless, deprived of language, explicitly different from all characteristics of Aristotelian political being whose crucial gift was logos. Consequently, the ruth of contemporary mistrust is not antidemocratical, as claimed by Krastev, but reflects an outstanding democratical orientation and presents a direct consequence of the resistance towards the cult of leader.

Anecdotally, attributions that others are biased pervade many domains. Yet, research examining the effects of perceptions of bias is sparse, possibly due to some prior researchers conflating bias with untrustworthiness. We sought to demonstrate that perceptions of bias and untrustworthiness are separable and have independent effects. The current work examines these differences in the persuasion domain, but this distinction has implications for other domains as well. Two experiments clarify the conceptual distinction between bias (skewed perception) and untrustworthiness (dishonesty) and three studies demonstrate that source bias can have a negative effect on persuasion and source credibility beyond any parallel effects of untrustworthiness, lack of expertise, and dislikability. The current work suggests that bias is an independent, but understudied source characteristic.

Recent theorizing on the relation between victim sensitivity and unethical behavior predicts that victim sensitivity is related to an asymmetrical focus on cues associated with untrustworthiness compared to cues associated with trustworthiness. This hypothesis and its consequences for the accuracy of social predictions are investigated in this article. In Study 1, participants rated the trustworthiness of 35 computer-animated faces that differed in their emotional expression. People high in victim sensitivity rated neutral and hostile faces more untrustworthy than people low in victim sensitivity, whereas no such effect was found for friendly faces. In Study 2, participants predicted the cooperativeness of 56 targets on the basis of minimal information. The accuracy of predictions was negatively related to victim sensitivity, and people high in victim sensitivity systematically underestimated targets’ cooperativeness. Thus, the asymmetrical focus on untrustworthiness cues among victim-sensitive individuals seems to impair rather than improve their social judgments.

Despite some of the recent examinations of an athlete’s reputational crisis (ARC), their negative spillover effects on endorsed and competing brands have been overlooked. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships between perceived severity, athlete endorser credibility (i.e., incompetence, untrustworthiness), and attitudes towards endorsed and competing brands. To enhance theoretical understanding of the phenomenon, the moderating role of consumer knowledge was also tested. Participants were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk ( N = 339). A multigroup structural equation model was employed to test the hypothesized model. Results indicated that the severity of an ARC is associated with the perceived incompetence and untrustworthiness of focal athletes. Perceived incompetence is associated with negative evaluation of an endorsed brand. Furthermore, this impact is significantly stronger for consumers with greater knowledge of the athletes than those who are less knowledgeable. Interestingly, competitor brands received negative impact indirectly from the athlete endorsers’ incompetence. This spillover effect is also manifested differently depending on the level of consumer knowledge.

Il presente contributo propone un modello euristico per lo studio della fiducia interpersonale. Sulla base di precedenti concettualizzazioni sul tema della fiducia consideriamo la fiducia interpersonale un processo interattivo, circolare e che prevede più fasi. Di conseguenza, sottolineiamo l'importanza di considerare le espressioni comportamentali di fiducia come l'esito di un processo dinamico in continua evoluzione piuttosto che come una disposizione personale statica. Nella presente tesi, miriamo ad approfondire i processi che sottostanno una minore predisposizione a fidarsi del prossimo da parte dei soggetti con tratti di personalità borderline (il così detto, untrustworthiness bias). Lungo l'intero elaborato di tesi esemplifichiamo un utilizzo del modello proposto per esplorare l'untrustworthiness bias in soggetti con tratti di personalità borderline. Nel primo Capitolo, forniamo una presentazione dettagliata del modello già menzionato in precedenza e una revisione sistematica della letteratura precedente in merito a difficoltà a fidarsi del prossimo in soggetti con Disturbo Borderline di Personalità. Nei capitolo successivi presentiamo cinque studi empirici che approfondiscono alcune fasi specifiche suggerite nel modello. Nei capitoli 2, 3 e 4 esploriamo l'influenza di alcune differenze individuali sull'untrustworthiness bias di soggetti con tratti di personalità borderline. Più di preciso, un questi capitoli ci occupiamo di esplorare rispettivamente la sensibilità all'esclusione sociale, all'ingiustizia e la sospettosità. In questi capitoli dimostriamo empiricamente come diverse disposizioni individuali possono influenzare diversamente la disposizione individuale a fidarsi del prossimo in soggetti con tratti borderline di personalità. Nel Capitolo 5, invece, esploriamo l'effetto che diversi indizi di fiducia (indizi diretti e indiretti) possono avere sull'untrustworthiness bias di soggetti con tratti borderline di personalità. I nostri risultati sottolineano come l'associazione tra tratti borderline e untrustworthiness bias non è stabile, bensì variabile. Infine, nel Capitolo 6, ci focalizziamo sull'influenza della situazione di Covid-19 sulle disposizioni individuali a fidarsi del prossimo in soggetti con tratti di personalità borderline. Sorprendentemente, troviamo disposizioni alla fiducia interpersonale simili tra individui che hanno partecipato allo studio durante il periodo di lock-down nonostante livelli variabili di tratti borderline di personalità. Nelle conclusioni presentiamo i nostri risultati principali e le implicazioni dell'usare, sia in ambito clinico sia empirico, il modello suggerito per studiare il fenomeno della fiducia interpersonale.
The present work proposes a novel heuristic model for studying Interpersonal Trust. Building upon previous conceptualizations of trust, we recommend considering trust as an iterative, circular, and multi-step process. Hence, we stress the importance of considering trust expressions as a dynamic process in continuous evolution rather than a static personality disposition. In the present work, our main aim is to shed light on the processes underlying the lower propensity of individuals with Borderline Personality Disorder features to trust others (i.e., untrustworthiness bias). Throughout the thesis, we exemplify the use of the proposed model for exploring the well-established untrustworthiness bias of individuals with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) features. Chapter 1 provides a detailed illustration of the model mentioned above and a systematic review of the previous literature on trust impairments among individuals with BPD. In the following chapters, we present five empirical studies that elucidate the peculiar functioning of individuals with BPD features in some of the stages suggested by the model. In Chapters 2, 3, and 4, we investigate the influence of some individual differences on BPD’s untrustworthiness bias. We respectively focus on the exploration of Rejection Sensitivity, Justice Sensitivity, and Suspiciousness. In these chapters, we empirically prove that different trust-related personal dispositions have a typical influence on the interpersonal trust dispositions of individuals with BPD features. In Chapter 5, we explore the effects of diverse (i.e., direct or indirect) cues on the untrustworthiness bias of individuals with BPD features. Our findings remarkably suggest that the association between BPD features and untrustworthiness bias is not stable rather variable. Finally, in Chapter 6, we focus on the influence of Covid-19 circumstances on the interpersonal trust dispositions of individuals with BPD features. Surprisingly, we found similar interpersonal trust dispositions among individuals with different BPD features’ levels in a large community sample recruited during confinement. In conclusion, we discuss our findings and the implications of using the suggested model to study Interpersonal Trust both from an empirical and clinical perspective.

This chapter explains the account of trustworthiness and untrustworthiness which fits the commitment account of trust and distrust. Trustworthiness is a matter of avoiding unfulfilled commitments, which requires both caution in incurring new commitments and diligence in fulfilling existing commitments. On this view, one can be trustworthy regardless of one’s motives for fulfilling one’s commitments. This is a negative account of trustworthiness, which means that one can be trustworthy whilst avoiding commitments as far as possible. In practice, through friendship, work and other social engagements we take on meta-commitments—commitments to incur future commitments. These can make it a matter of trustworthiness to take on certain new commitments. Untrustworthiness can arise from insincerity or bad intentions, but it can also arise from enthusiasm and becoming over-committed. A trustworthy person must not allow her commitments to outstrip her competence.

Political theorists claim that political trust is located on the continuum that runs from blind faith to enforceable contract. Trust ‘as passion’ borders on blind faith, while trust ‘as calculation’ comes close to enforceable contract. More often located between these extremes, political trust is usually a mix of faith and calculation, varying from largely irrational responses to the charisma of political leaders to largely calculated ‘bets on the actions of others’. This chapter discusses political distrust in post-Communist Europe and looks at four broad categories of potential influences (all negative) on political trust: distrustful citizens, untrustworthy institutions, discordance between citizens and government, and hard times. It also examines incompetence, scandal, dishonesty, and corruption; responsiveness and fairness; the untrustworthiness of elected and unelected officials; and the unfairness that citizens perceive or actually experience.

While the second chapter of Style in Narrative addressed authorial canon (scope) and story (level), the third chapter considers a single work (scope) and narration (level). Faulkner’s novel As I Lay Dying seems to present a straightforward case of multiple narration. However, attention to details reveals that the novel is much more complex and apparently contradictory. In other words, the narrational style is marked by ambiguity and hints of untrustworthiness, along with unresolved issues of narrator definition (including, for example, hints that Addie could be in effect narrating the entire novel). The chapter shows not only the relevance of narration to style (and of stylistic analysis to narration), but the relevance of indeterminacy and ambivalence to style (and stylistic analysis) as well. The chapter concludes by examining some thematic implications of these features of narrational style and what they may suggest about Faulkner’s relation to American literature and literary modernism.

Abstract Chapter 5 considers the cultural ramification of Jewish involvement in the diamond business. It analyzes late nineteenth-century representations that associated Jews with diamonds, particularly in the English-language press, political cartoons, and popular fictions. Victorian fiction, for example, appropriated long-held stereotypes about the Jews’ alleged innate business acumen, untrustworthiness, and thirst for power. Jewish prominence strengthened already-existing stereotypes, feeding popular views of Jewish obsessions with profit and economic control. In an era when racial anti-Semitism was gaining ground and when East-European Jewish immigration to England, the United States, and South Africa peaked, Jewish success in the international diamond trade stirred up nativist anxieties that found expression in the literary press. While diamonds in the long run empowered many Jews, their prominence in the industry worked against them as well. The potency of the diamond exposed the limits to full Jewish integration and acceptance in the modern period.

‘Fear of popery’ was a major factor in the collapse of royal government in 1640–1, and it was a ubiquitous feature of mid-seventeenth-century politics. From time to time, the treason statutes were deployed against Catholic clergymen again, that is, against those whom some Protestants undoubtedly blamed for the recent catastrophes of royal government. The crown’s failure to respond with the appropriate levels both of brutality towards Catholics and also of Machiavellian cynicism in the face of the king’s critics was a major contributor to the king’s reputation, ironically, for untrustworthiness. At the same time, there was not the widespread use of the treason law that one might have expected from reading the works of William Prynne. The complexities of the politics of the 1640s and 1650s meant that, despite sporadic and targeted prosecutions, the various constituent parts of the Catholic community were able, particularly in the later 1640s, to look for a deal with those who had appropriated the king’s authority. This was a manoeuvre associated with the so-called Blackloists who were, in some respects, the heirs of the appellants of the late sixteenth century. During the 1650s, although there were two high-profile executions of Catholic clergymen, the way in which power was distributed in the new republic made those events as intensely controversial as anything seen since the start of the English Reformation.

Imagine yourself saying, “I just don’t trust him.” It’s not an uncommon thing to say. But what conclusions do your listeners draw when they hear that? “I just don’t trust her” can set off all sorts of alarms, all sorts of conjectures. But what does that statement really mean? Is she likely to tell lies, miss deadlines, cheat on report cards? Do you believe she changes her mind frequently, is too friendly, arrives late to school? Not all accusations of “untrustworthiness” are equally dire. Are we willing to become quizzical about an “I don’t trust him” statement? By asking the clarifying question “You don’t trust him to do what?” we can illuminate the meaning. And the accusation of being untrustworthy is almost always worth a closer look. “I don’t trust him to get his work done” addresses a type of trust very different from that associated with “I don’t trust him to deposit all the donated money.” In the same way, “I don’t trust her understanding of the curriculum” involves a different notion of trust than “I don’t trust her to report accurate scores.” Trust is an attribute that is very precious to most of us. We would likely be hurt and worried if we knew that someone had stated he didn’t trust us. And in the close communities of schools, a statement of distrust can usurp goodwill and collegiality. The next time we hear the statement “I don’t trust him,” we could ask, “What has caused you to lose that trust?” Clarifying the accusation could give everyone relief and perspective, including the speaker. When these moments of relief and clar­ity settle into the fabric of our schools, we can feel the revival of energy, vitality, and momentum.