Editing Reputation (section)

== Cognitive view of reputation ==
{{Unreferenced section|date=May 2021}}
The [[cognitive]] view of reputation has become increasingly prominent in reputation research.  It has led to improved understanding of the role played by reputation in a number of practical domains and scientific fields. In the study of [[cooperation]] and [[social dilemma]]s, for instance, the role of reputation as a partner selection [[Mechanism (sociology)|mechanism]] started to be appreciated in the early 1980s.<ref>Takács, K. (2022). "A Reputation-Centered Theory of Human Cooperation and Social Organization." *Sociologica*, 16(2), 11–51. [https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/14196 doi:10.6092/issn.1971-8853/14196]</ref>

Working toward such a definition, reputation can be viewed as a socially transmitted meta-[[belief]] (i.e., belief about belief) that is a property of an agent, that results from the [[attitude (psychology)|attitude]]s other actors have about some socially desirable [[behaviour]], be it cooperation, [[reciprocity (social psychology)|reciprocity]], or [[norm (sociology)|norm]]-compliance. Reputation plays a crucial role in the [[evolution]] of these behaviours: reputation transmission allows socially desirable behaviour to spread. Rather than concentrating on the property only, the cognitive [[Mental model|model]] of reputation accounts not only for reputation-formation but also for the propagation of reputation.

To model this aspect, it is necessary to specify and develop a more refined [[Taxonomy (general)|classification]] of reputation. In informal settings, [[gossip]], although vague, may contain precious hints both to facts ("I've been told this [[physician]] has shown questionable behavior") and to conflicts taking place at the information level (if a [[candidate]] for a [[role]] spreads defamatory information about another candidate, whom should you trust?).

Moreover, the expression "it is said that John Smith is a cheater" is intrinsically a reputation spreading act, because on one hand it refers to a (possibly false) common opinion, and on the other the very act of saying "it is said" is self-assessing, since it provides at least one factual occasion when that something is said, because the person who says so (the gossiper), while appearing to spread the saying a bit further, may actually be in the phase of initiating it.

Gossip can also be used as an identifier only – as when gossiping about unreachable [[icons]], like [[Royal family|royalty]] or [[show business|showbiz]] [[celebrities]] – useful only to show the gossiper belongs to the group of the informed ones. While most cases seem to share the characteristic of being primarily used to predict future behavior, they can have, for example, manipulative sub-goals, even more important than the forecast.

In the case of a communication between two parties, one (the advisee) that is requesting advice about the [[potential]] for [[Risk|danger]] in a [[financial transaction]] with another party (the potential partner, target), and the other (the adviser, evaluator) that is giving [[advice (opinion)|advice]].  Roughly speaking, the advice could fall under one of the following three categories :

# the adviser declares it believes the potential partner is (is not) good for the transaction in object;
# the adviser declares it believes another (named or otherwise defined) agent or set of agents believes the potential partner is (is not) good for the transaction in object;
# the adviser declares it believes in an undefined set of agents, hence there is a belief the potential partner is (is not) good for the transaction in object.

Note the care to maintain the possible levels of truth (the adviser declares – but could be lying – it believes – but could be wrong – etc..). The cases are listed, as it is evident, in decreasing order of responsibility. While one could feel most actual examples fall under the first case, the other two are not unnecessarily complicated nor actually infrequent. Indeed, most of the common gossip falls under the third category, and, except for electronic [[Social interaction|interaction]], this is the most frequent form of referral. All examples concern the evaluation of a given object (target), a social agent (which may be either individual or supra-individual, and in the latter case, either a group or a collective), held by another social agent, the evaluator.

The examples above can be turned into more precise definitions using the concept of [[social]] [[evaluation]]. At this point, we can propose to coin a new [[lexical item]], ''image'', whose character should be immediately evident and is clearly linked to reputation.

=== Image ===
'''Image''' is a global or averaged evaluation of a given target on the part of an agent. It consists of (a set of) social evaluations about the characteristics of the target. Image as an object of communication is what is exchanged in examples 1 and 2, above. In the second case, we call it third-party image. It may concern a subset of the target's characteristics, i.e., its willingness to comply with socially accepted norms and customs, or its [[skills]] (ways), or its definition as pertaining to a precise agent. Indeed, we can define special cases of image, including third-party image, the evaluation that an agent believes a third party has of the target, or even shared image, that is, an evaluation shared by a [[Social group|group]]. Not even this last is reputation, since it tries to define too precisely the mental status of the group.

'''Reputation''', as distinct from image, is the process and the effect of transmitting a target image. We call reputation transmission a communication of an evaluation without the specification of the evaluator, if not for a group attribution, and only in the default sense discussed before. This covers the case of example 3 above. More precisely, reputation is a believed, social, meta-evaluation; it is built upon three distinct but interrelated objects :
# a cognitive representation, or more precisely a believed evaluation – this could be somebody's image, but is enough that this consist of a communicated evaluation;
# a population object, i.e., a propagating believed evaluation; and
# an objective emergent property at the agent level, i.e., what the agent is believed to be.

In fact, reputation is a highly dynamic [[phenomenon]] in two distinct senses: it is subject to change, especially as an effect of corruption, errors, [[deception]], etc.; and it emerges as an effect of a multi-level bidirectional process. Reputation is also how others know and perceive you as an individual.

While ''image'' only moves (when transmitted and accepted) from one individual cognition to another, the [[Anonymity|anonymous]] character of reputation makes it a more complex phenomenon. Reputation proceeds from the level of individual cognition (when is born, possibly as an image, but not always) to the level of social propagation (at this level, it not necessarily believed as from any specific agent) and from this level back to individual cognition again (when it is accepted).

Moreover, once it gets to the population level, reputation gives rise to a further property at the agent level. It is both what people think about targets and what targets are in the eyes of others. From the very moment an agent is targeted by the [[community]], his or her life will change whether he or she wants it or not or believes it or not. Reputation has become the immaterial, more powerful equivalent of a [[Scarlet Letter (disambiguation)|scarlet letter]] sewed to one's clothes. It is more powerful because it may not even be perceived by the individual to whom it sticks, and consequently it is out of the individual's power to control and manipulate.

More simply speaking for those who want a working [[definition]] of reputation, reputation is the [[:wikt:sum|sum]] of impressions held by a [[company]]'s [[stakeholder (corporate)|stakeholder]]s. In other words, reputation is in the "eyes of the beholder". It need not be just a company's reputation but could be the reputation of an individual, country, [[brand]], [[political party]], [[Industry (economics)|industry]]. But the key point in reputation is not what the [[leadership]] insists but what others perceive it to be. For a company, its reputation is how esteemed it is in the eyes of its [[employee]]s, [[customer]]s, [[investor]]s, [[skilled worker|talent]], [[wikt:prospective|prospective]] candidates, [[competitor]]s, [[industry analyst|analyst]]s, [[alumni]], [[Regulatory agency|regulators]] and the list goes on.