Skip to main content

The Role of Trustworthiness Facets for Developing Social Media Applications: A Structured Literature Review

Angela Borchert ; Maritta Heisel (2022) — Information

Citation activity

Total citations · Google Scholar
Unavailable
Average per calendar year
Citation count unavailable

Counts reflect Google Scholar’s coverage and do not measure research quality. Source, calculation and limitations

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.3390/info13010034 (opens in a new tab)

Country:   Global
Tags:   Catfishing, Computer Mediated Introduction, Identity Authentication, Online Dating, Social Media, Software Engineering, Structured Literature Review, Trustworthiness
What do these research terms mean?
Preprint
A manuscript shared before formal peer review and publication. Check whether a later published version is available.
Dataset
A collection of data or examples for others to inspect or reuse. It can appear in Library search and topic mapping, but RSRC does not use dataset records as evidence in Research Insights.
Dissertation or thesis
Research submitted for an academic degree. This describes its format, not its reliability.
Journal article
An article published in a journal. This label alone does not establish peer review, study quality, or how well the findings apply elsewhere.
Qualitative research
Examines experiences, meanings, or processes, often through interviews or observations. It can explain how something happens without estimating how common it is.
Quantitative research
Uses numerical measurements to describe patterns or test relationships. A relationship between two measurements does not by itself show that one causes the other.
Systematic review
Uses a planned, documented method to find and assess research addressing a question. Its conclusions still depend on the included studies and what the search covered.
Meta-analysis
Statistically combines results from multiple studies. Combining studies does not remove weaknesses in their design or make unlike populations interchangeable.
Not classified
This record has no recognized label in this filter. It does not mean the publication used no method, or that no research exists.

Definitions draw on DataCite resource types; Cochrane review methods; NLM: association and causation. RSRC’s dataset and classification rules are explained in our methodology.

Citation tools
Download RIS Download BibTeX 


              
              

            

          

        


      

      

    

        
Transparency

        
Evidence and review status

        
This page contains AI-generated content. No human content review or subject-matter-expert review is recorded.

    


    

                    

                
Source basis

                

                    Downloaded PDF
                

            

                    

                
Source updates

                

                    No notice found at last check
                

            

                    

                
AI-generated page content

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Automated checks

                

                    Passed
                

            

                    

                
Administrative approval

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Human content review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

                    

                
Subject-matter-expert review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

            


    

        
            How this was prepared
        
        

                            

                    
Source basis

                    

                    
RSRC downloaded and privately stored a copy of the paper for internal analysis. The PDF is not offered to viewers from this page.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    PDF added to RSRC:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Source updates

                    

                    
No incoming update notice was found in the dated Crossref response. Coverage is incomplete, particularly for corrections and expressions of concern; this is not a guarantee that the source is valid or unchanged.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Last source-status attempt:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
AI-generated page content

                    

                    
AI-generated research notes displayed on this page: Synopsis, Identified gaps, Methods, Limitations, Future work. The paper itself is not described as AI-generated.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Document analysis recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Synopsis generation recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Page record updated:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Automated checks

                    

                    
The current, source-bound synopsis passed the recorded versioned publication checks.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Checks completed:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                            

                            
                                View passed checks (3)
                            
                            
    
                                                                    
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
    • 
                                                                    
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
    • 
                                                                    
  • English-source lexical grounding check
    • 
                                                            

                        

                                        

                

                            

                    
Administrative approval

                    

                    
An authenticated administrator approved the bibliographic record for public Library display. This is not a review of every research claim.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Approved for public display:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Human content review

                    

                    
No human review is recorded for the AI-generated content displayed on this page.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Subject-matter-expert review

                    

                    
RSRC has not recorded review of this content by a subject-matter or methods expert.


                    
                                        

                

                    

    


    

        Review-state definitions

        Found a possible error?
        Request a correction.
    



    



              

        
                  

            
Synopsis

            
This publication presents a structured literature review on trustworthiness facets relevant to developing social media applications that involve computer-mediated introductions (CMIs). The authors aim to identify attributes users assess to judge the trustworthiness of three trustee types—individual users, organizations (e.g., service providers), and the CMIs themselves (the software). They argue that such assessments influence decisions to interact and perceived safety, and they seek to support software engineers with a guideline for selecting appropriate facets during requirements analysis. The study synthesizes 264 works, ultimately analyzing 100 that clearly defined trustworthiness facets, and organizes these facets into three tables corresponding to the trustee types, with definitions and connections to broader trust research. Methodologically, the authors describe a data-collection process that screens literature for facets tied to perceived trustworthiness or trust development, and they document facets that recur across contexts such as online dating, e-commerce, and platform regulation. They distinguish facets related to observable operation of technology from broader quality attributes, and they present a guideline for facet selection grounded in design thinking. The guideline is illustrated through a catfishing use case in online dating, showing how facets such as honesty, predictability, and integrity can inform feature design and user signaling. The discussion covers how trustworthiness facets relate to initial trust and knowledge-based trust in CMIs, potential software features to support trust assessments (e.g., profile authentication cues, gradual self-disclosure), and the risks of facet misuse by users or providers. The authors also acknowledge limitations, including resource constraints that limited engagement with user perspectives, and they emphasize the need to maintain neutral presentation of facets to avoid misrepresentation. They conclude that a facet-based view can help engineers design features that support rather than mislead trust assessments, while noting the potential for future research on facet interdependencies. The article ends by reiterating the value of the guideline for practitioners and researchers.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
Research on trustworthiness facets in social media, particularly computer-mediated introductions, remains emerging. The review does not establish which facets have the greatest effect on trustworthiness assessment or trust development. The interdependence of facets across individuals, platforms, and service providers also requires study. The applicability of facets transferred from other domains to social media and online dating needs validation.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
This structured literature review followed PRISMA-P reporting principles and the literature-review guidance of vom Brocke et al. Searches of Scopus, Web of Science, two specialist journals, and backward and forward citation trails used 13 keyword-search rounds. Of 264 publications from 1957–2021, 100 were retained after exclusions. The authors grouped semantically similar trustworthiness facets for individuals, technology, and organizations, then proposed a design-thinking-based selection guideline and illustrated it using catfishing in online dating.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
The practical usefulness of the facet overview and the selection guideline has not yet been evaluated. Because social-media and computer-mediated-introduction research is emerging, the review included facets from broader domains; their context-dependent applicability to social media requires validation. The review did not rank facets by their relative influence on trust or trustworthiness, largely because reviewed studies usually did not provide that information. The catfishing illustration did not include a direct user study.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Validate the applicability of the facet overview to social media and computer-mediated introduction contexts, and evaluate the guideline’s practicability and efficiency. Develop and test a structured method for deriving software features that support users’ trustworthiness assessments from identified facets. Research should also address technical detection and prevention of ethical violations and misleading trustworthiness presentations.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

            See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.