ISBN: 978-83-8419-172-9 ISBN (online): 978-83-8419-173-6 ISSN: 0860-2751 OAI
DOI: 10.18276/978-83-8419-173-6
Issue archive / T. (MDXXIII) 1449
| Year: | 2026 |
| Field: | Field of Social Sciences |
| Discipline: | management and quality sciences |
| Keywords: | trust; joint action; organizational trust; MITrust; Decision + Action; artificial intelligence |
| Authors: |
Monika
Różycka
Uniwersytet Szczeciński |
Information
Electronic version of the publication available under CC BY-SA 4.0 license after 12 months from the date of release: October 2026
Printed version of the publication can be purchased in the store of the University of Szczecin Press: wn.usz.edu.pl/sklep/
Funded by the Ministry of Science within the framework of the Program "Regional Initiative of Excellence"
This project is funded by the Minister of Science and Higher Education
Abstract
Trust as Joint Action? From Social Relations and Organizations to AI
The aim of the monograph Trust as Joint Action? From Social Relations and Organizations to AI is to present trust as one of the mechanisms for organizing joint action under conditions of uncertainty, interdependence, and limited control. The monograph adopts an interdisciplinary, theoretical-synthetic perspective, combining selected social, historical, biological, and organizational approaches. The analysis leads to the identification of three elementary architectures of joint action: information-flow-based, functional, and coordinative. It also demonstrates that trust is not identical with joint action or cooperation and does not constitute a simple opposite of control, law, procedures, or standardization, but may coexist with these mechanisms. The practical dimension of trust is organized through the original Decision + Action formula, which conceptualizes trust in terms of a choice and its enactment in a situation of dependence on another party. The organizational context of trust is further developed through the original concepts of the two-faced leader syndrome and the MITrust Model of Institutional Trust, which integrates individual characteristics, relational and normative conditions of trust, and mechanisms of organizational joint action.
The theoretical analyses are complemented by a quantitative, cross-sectional study of trust in artificial intelligence in a business context, conducted on a sample of 450 people managing enterprises, with analyses of declared trust based on responses from 348 AI users. The results indicate that perceived benefits showed the strongest association with trust; positive relationships were also found for frequency of AI use and perceived availability of training and education. Perceived risks were not significantly associated with trust at the level of simple correlation, but remained negatively associated with it after the other variables were taken into account in the regression model. The monograph thus points to the need to analyze trust not only as a declared belief, but also in relation to the foundations, conditions, and consequences of decisions and actions undertaken in relationships with people, organizations, and technology.
Bibliography
| 1. | Książki i monografie |
| 2. | Adams, R. McC. (1981). Heartland of cities: Surveys of ancient settlement and land use on the central floodplain of the Euphrates. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. |
| 3. | Andreau, J. (1999). Banking and business in the Roman world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| 4. | Bauman, Z. (2017). Retrotopia. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. |
| 5. | Bresson, A. (2016). The making of the ancient Greek economy: Institutions, markets, and growth in the city-states (S. Rendall, tłum.). Princeton: Princeton University Press. |
| 6. | Chandler, A.D., Jr. (1977). The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, M A: Harvard University Press. |
| 7. | Cohen, E.E. (1992). Athenian economy and society: A banking perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press. |
| 8. | Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study. |
| 9. | Dollinger, P. (1970). The German Hansa. Stanford: Stanford University Press. |
| 10. | Fisher, H. (2003). Pierwsza płeć. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Jacek Santorski & Co. |
| 11. | Follett, M.P. (1941). Dynamic administration: The collected papers of Mary Parker Follett (H.C. Metcalf & L. Urwick, Eds.). Harper & Brothers |
| 12. | Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. |
| 13. | Greif, A. (2006). Institutions and the path to the modern economy: Lessons from medieval trade. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| 14. | Hounshell, D.A. (1984). From the American system to mass production, 1800–1932: The development of manufacturing technology in the United States. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univer - sity Press. |
| 15. | Hryniewicz, J.T. (2007). Stosunki pracy w polskich organizacjach. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. |
| 16. | Latusek-Jurczak, D. (2019). Zaufanie w zarządzaniu organizacjami. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. |
| 17. | Lehner, M. (1997). The complete pyramids. London: Thames & Hudson. |
| 18. | Liker, J.K. (2004). The Toyota way: 14 management principles from the world’s greatest manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill. |
| 19. | Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power: Two works (T. Burns, G. Poggi, red.; H. Davis, J. Raffan, K. Rooney, tłum.). Wiley. |
| 20. | Moore, G.E. (1919). Zasady etyki (C. Znamierowski, tłum.). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo M. Arcta. |
| 21. | Morgan, G. (1997). Obrazy organizacji (Z. Wiankowska-Ładyka, tłum.). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. |
| 22. | Ogilvie, S. (2011). Institutions and European trade: Merchant guilds, 1000–1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| 23. | Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster. |
| 24. | Putnam, R.D., Leonardi, R., Nanetti, R. Y. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. |
| 25. | Reagle, J.M., Jr. (2010). Good faith collaboration: The culture of Wikipedia. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. |
| 26. | Roszkowski, W. (1995a). Najnowsza historia Polski 1914–1993. T. 1: 1914–1945. Warszawa: Świat Książki. |
| 27. | Roszkowski, W. (1995b). Najnowsza historia Polski 1914–1993. T. 2: 1945–1993. Warszawa: Świat Książki. |
| 28. | Różycka, M. (2019). Wartości kobiece w biznesie. Szczecin: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. |
| 29. | Różycka, M. (2024). Trust in leadership in the international context of enterprise organizational culture: Theoretical and empirical analysis. Szczecin: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. https://doi.org/10.18276/978-83-7972-699-8. |
| 30. | Schein, E.H., Schein, P.A. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (wyd. 5). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. |
| 31. | Sztompka, P. (2000). Trauma wielkiej zmiany. Społeczne koszty transformacji. Warszawa: ISP PAN. |
| 32. | Sztompka, P. (2007). Zaufanie. Fundament społeczeństwa. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Znak. |
| 33. | Taylor, F.W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Brothers. |
| 34. | Tourish, D. (2019). Management studies in crisis: Fraud, deception and meaningless research. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer sity Press. |
| 35. | Verboven, K. (2002). The economy of friends: Economic aspects of amicitia and patronage in the Late Republic. Bruxelles: Collection Latomus. |
| 36. | Wittfogel, K.A. (1957). Oriental despotism: A comparative study of total power. New Haven: Yale University Press. |
| 37. | Zabłocka, J. (1982). Historia Bliskiego Wschodu w starożytności (od początków osadnictwa do podboju perskiego). Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich. |
| 38. | Rozdziały w monografiach i pracach zbiorowych |
| 39. | Ingarden, R. (1970). Czego nie wiemy o wartościach. W: R. Ingarden, Studia z estetyki, t. 3 (s. 220–257). Warszawa: PWN. |
| 40. | Leonard, A.B. (2016). Introduction: The nature and study of marine insurance. W A.B. Leonard (red.), Marine insurance: Origins and institutions, 1300–1850 (s. 2–22). London: Palgrave Macmillan. |
| 41. | Ogilvie, S. (2020). Guilds and the economy. W: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance. Oxford University Press. https:// doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190625979.013.538. |
| 42. | Piccinno, L. (2016). Genoa, 1340–1620: Early development of marine insurance. W A.B. Leonard (red.), Marine insurance: Origins and institutions, 1300–1850 (s. 24–45). London: Palgrave Macmillan. |
| 43. | Różycka, M. (2016). Matriarchat czy patriarchat? Płeć i kobiecość w społecznościach archaicznych. W: J. Nowakowska-Grunt, I. Miciuła (red.), Otoczenie organizacyjne a uwarunkowania społeczno-gospodarcze (s. 91–99). Katowice: Sophia. |
| 44. | Artykuły naukowe |
| 45. | Anderson, A., Chilczuk, S., Nelson, K., Ruther, R., Wall-Scheffler, C. (2023). The Myth of Man the Hunter: Women’s contribution to the hunt across ethnographic contexts. PLOS ONE, 18(6), e0287101. |
| 46. | Benk, M., Kerstan, S., von Wangenheim, F., Ferrario, A. (2025). Twenty- -four years of empirical research on trust in AI: A bibliometric review of trends, overlooked issues, and future directions. AI & Society, 40, 2083–2106. doi: 10.1007/s00146-024-02059-y. |
| 47. | Conradt, L., Roper, T.J. (2005). C onsensus decision making i n a nimals. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20(8), 449–456. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tree.2005.05.008. |
| 48. | Das, T.K., Teng, B.-S. (1998). Between trust and control: Developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 491–512. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926623. |
| 49. | Dietz, G. (2011). Going back to the source: Why do people trust each other? Journal of Trust Research, 1(2), 215–222. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/21515581.2011.603514 |
| 50. | Dumouchel, P. (2005). Trust as an action. European Journal of Sociology. Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 46(3), 417–428. https://doi. org/10.1017/S0003975605000160. |
| 51. | Ezzamel, M. (2004). Work organization in the Middle Kingdom, ancient Egypt. Organization, 11(4), 497–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1350508404044060. |
| 52. | Finch, J. (1987). The vignette technique in survey research. Sociology, 21(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038587021001008. |
| 53. | Foley, C., Pettorelli, N., Foley, L. (2008). Severe drought and calf survival in elephants. Biology Letters, 4(5), 541–544. https://doi.org/10.1098/ rsbl.2008.0370. |
| 54. | Fulmer, C.A., Gelfand, M.J. (2012). At what level (and in whom) we trust: Trust across multiple organizational levels. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1167–1230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312439327. |
| 55. | Hall, M.A., Dugan, E., Zheng, B., Mishra, A.K. (2001). Trust in physicians and medical institutions: What is it, can it be measured, and does it matter? The Milbank Quarterly, 79(4), 613–639. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1468-0009.00223. |
| 56. | Hausner, J. (2017). Wartości, normy, dobra. Zarządzanie Publiczne, 1(39), 134–158. |
| 57. | Izdebski, A., Czerwiński, S., Jankowiak, M., Danielewski, M., Fiołna, S., Gromig, R., Guzowski, P., Haghipour, N., Hajdas, I., Kołaczek, P., Lamentowicz, M., Marcisz, K., Niebieszczański, J., Sankiewicz, P., Wagner, B. (2025). Unbalanced social-ecological acceleration led to state formation failure in early medieval Poland. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(18), e2409056122. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2409056122. |
| 58. | Kaplan, A.D., Kessler, T.T., Brill, J C., Hancock, P.A. (2023). Trust in artificial intelligence: Meta-analytic findings. Human Factors, 65(2), 337–359. doi: 10.1177/00187208211013988. |
| 59. | Kirkbride, D. (1962). Excavation of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village at Seyl Aqlat, Beidha. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 6–7. |
| 60. | Larzelere, R.E., Huston, T.L. (1980). The Dyadic Trust Scale: Toward understanding interpersonal trust in close relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42(3), 595–604. https://doi.org/10.2307/351903. |
| 61. | Makarewicz, C.A., Finlayson, B. (2018). C onstructing c ommunity in the Neolithic of southern Jordan: Quotidian practice in communal architecture. PLOS ONE, 13(6), e0193712. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0193712 |
| 62. | Malmendier, U. (2009). Law and finance “at the origin”. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(4), 1076–1108. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.47.4.1076 |
| 63. | Manser, M.B. (1999). Response of foraging group members to sentinel calls in suricates, Suricata suricatta. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 266(1423), 1013–1019. https://doi. org/10.1098/rspb.1999.0737. |
| 64. | Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. https://doi.org/10.2307/258792. |
| 65. | McEvily, B., Perrone, V., Zaheer, A. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science, 14(1), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1287/ orsc.14.1.91.12814. |
| 66. | Möllering, G., Bachmann, R., Lee, S.H. (2004). Introduction: Understanding organizational trust – foundations, constellations, and issues of operationalisation. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(6), 556–570. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940410551480. |
| 67. | Nowak, S. (1979). System wartości społeczeństwa polskiego. Studia Socjologiczne, 4(75), 155–173. |
| 68. | Reynolds, N.-S., Lander, M.W. (2024). From building and preserving to eroding trust: A multi-level analysis. Group & Organization Management, 49(4), 1012–1044. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231190155. |
| 69. | Rotter, J.B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35(4), 651–665. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01454.x. |
| 70. | Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S., Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404. https://doi.org/10.5465/ AMR.1998.926617. |
| 71. | Sampaio, E., Sridhar, V.H., Francisco, F.A., Nagy, M., Sacchi, A., Strandburg- Peshkin, A., Nührenberg, P., Rosa, R., Couzin, I.D., Gingins, S. (2024). Multidimensional social influence drives leadership and composition-dependent success in octopus–fish hunting groups. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 8, 2072–2084. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41559-024-02525-2. |
| 72. | Seeley, T.D., Buhrman, S.C. (2001). Nest-site selection in honey bees: How well do swarms implement the “best-of-N” decision rule? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 49, 416–427. https://doi. org/10.1007/s002650000299. |
| 73. | Seeley, T.D., Visscher, P.K., Schlegel, T., Hogan, P.M., Franks, N.R., Marshall, J.A.R. (2012). Stop signals provide cross inhibition in collective decision-making by honeybee swarms. Science, 335(6064), 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1210361. |
| 74. | Seeley, T.D. (2003). Consensus building during nest-site selection in honey bee swarms: The expiration of dissent. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 53(6), 417–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-003-0598-z |
| 75. | Seeley, T.D., Visscher, P.K. (2003). Choosing a home: How the scouts in a honey bee swarm perceive the completion of their group decision making. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 54, 511–520. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00265-003-0664-6. |
| 76. | Siau, K., Wang, W. (2018). Building trust in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and robotics. Cutter Business Technology Journal, 31(2), 47–53. |
| 77. | Six, F.E., Sorge, A. (2008). Creating a high-trust organization: An exploration into organizational policies that stimulate interpersonal trust building. Journal of Management Studies, 45(5), 857–884. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00763.x. |
| 78. | Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 339–358. https://doi.org/ 10.2307/2392246. |
| 79. | Szumlicz, T. (2015). Wzrost zaufania do zakładów ubezpieczeń w świetle Diagnozy Społecznej 2015. Wiadomości Ubezpieczeniowe, 3, 3–19. |
| 80. | Valenchon, M., Deneubourg, J.-L., Nesterova, A.P., Petit, O. (2022), Does a high social status confer greater levels of trust from groupmates? An experimental study of leadership in domestic horses. Behavioural Processes, 201, 104708. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2022.104708 |
| 81. | Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., Kaiser, R.B. (2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution: Some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63(3), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X. 63.3.182. |
| 82. | Venkataraman, V.V., Hoffman, J., Farquharson, K., Davis, H.E., Hagen, E.H., Hames, R.B., Hewlett, B.S., Glowacki, L., Jang, H., Kelly, R., Kramer, K., Lew-Levy, S., Starkweather, K., Syme, K., Stibbard-Hawkes, D.N.E. (2024). Female foragers sometimes hunt, yet gendered divisions of labor are real: A comment on Anderson et al. (2023) The Myth of Man the Hunter. Evolution and Human Behavior, 45(4), 106586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2024.04.014 |
| 83. | Wiśniewska, J., Różycka, M. (2021). The problem of trust in innovative ICT technologies used in e-health systems. The case study of private health care units located in Szczecin. Procedia Computer Science, 192, 3647–3656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.09.138 |
| 84. | Raporty, komunikaty i opracowania instytucjonalne |
| 85. | Baszczak, Ł., Kiełczewska, A., Rozbicka, I., Wincewicz-Price, A., Zyzik, R. (2024). Kapitał społeczny w Polsce. Warszawa: Polski Instytut Ekonomiczny. |
| 86. | CBOS (2022). Zaufanie społeczne. Komunikat z badań nr 37/2022. Warszawa: Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. |
| 87. | CBOS (2024). Zaufanie społeczne. Komunikat z badań nr 40/2024. Warszawa: Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. |
| 88. | Czapiński, J., Panek, T. (red.) (2015). Diagnoza społeczna 2015. Warunki i jakość życia Polaków. Warszawa: Rada Monitoringu Społecznego. |
| 89. | European Social Survey European Research Infrastructure (ESS ERIC) (2025). ESS11 – integrated file, edition 3.0 [Data set]. Sikt – Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research. https:// doi.org/10.21338/ess11e03_0. |
| 90. | Ipsos (2022). Interpersonal trust across the world: A 30-country Global Advisor survey. Global Advisor, March 2022. |
| 91. | Raport (2019). Raport o stanie sektora małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw w Polsce. Warszawa: PARP. |
| 92. | Raport i rekomendacje dla biznesu w Polsce w kontekście zaufania do sztucznej inteligencji. Postawy środowiska biznesu wobec AI. Szczecin: Uniwersytet Szczeciński, 2026, https://zaufanie.ai/wp-content/ uploads/2026/09/ ZAUFANIE-AI.pdf |
| 93. | Statistics Netherlands (2025). Trust in others, legal system and politics; European comparison. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (CBS). |