Journal of Trust Research最新文献

{"title":"A nonverbal signal of trustworthiness: An evolutionarily relevant model","authors":"A. Wood","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2021.1922912","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2021.1922912","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study introduces and provides evidence of an Evolutionarily Stable Signalling (ESS) System in the buyer-seller context through three experiments. An ESS system is one where a signaller (in this study, the seller) conveys positive intent to the receiver (customers) in a reliable manner that leads to the buyer’s benefits. This study uses the ‘felt’ or genuine smile of salespeople as a reliable signal. The non-consciously generated genuine smile of a salesperson leads to positive, trustworthy assessments by buyers. Buyers reach their conclusions about the trustworthiness of the salesperson rapidly and often without conscious evaluations. These studies simultaneously capture the response time and the cognitive assessments of the subjects. Their decision on the trustworthiness of the salesperson likely provides the foundation for subsequent cooperative exchanges. Using both response time and cognitive assessments allows these series of experiments to develop evidence of this ESS system in the present day.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2021.1922912","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49406176","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"We can’t go on together with suspicious minds: Forecasting errors in evaluating the appreciation of denials","authors":"Christopher P. Reinders Folmer, D. De Cremer, Maarten J. J. Wubben, Marius van Dijke","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2020.1738944","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2020.1738944","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In light of public examples of false denials, it is unsurprising that people’s beliefs about denials often are negative. However, inconsistent with such beliefs, denials often are sincere, and can facilitate trust repair. To illuminate this mismatch, we advance a framework based on Construal Level Theory, to explain how people may make a forecasting error when predicting their responses to denials. In two experimental studies, we reveal that people who actually received a denial after a possible transgression (a) were less suspicious, and experienced greater trust, and (b) displayed more trusting behavior than people who imagined this. These results suggest that people underestimate the effectiveness of denials in the reconciliation process.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2020.1738944","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47584872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Contracts as trust builders","authors":"Marc Järvinen, Minna Branders","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1705844","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1705844","url":null,"abstract":"Cooperative relationships require trust. Trust, on the other hand, requires a framework, i.e. an environment, in which it can be built. Numerous studies have focused on the antecedents of trust. For example, various trust-building factors have been identified in these studies. However, there is no comprehensive study exploring the ways in which contracts support the trust-building environment. This study attempts to fill this gap by drawing on the notion that contracts have a framing effect on trust, thereby creating an environment that can lead to trust building. The study entails an analysis of eight contracts made between the Finnish Defence Forces and its civilian contractors. The analysis is theory-driven and applies a framework of trust-building factors. The conclusion of the study is that the contracts support the environment by defining roles and responsibilities, relevant legal regulation, communication processes, and forums for interaction. However, trust building would benefit if contracts were improved in five ways, namely by establishing fewer forums of communication, encompassing personal relations and potentially deviating interests, providing more communication via avenues other than key personnel, carefully considering the need for restrictive confidentiality clauses, and using contracts to pursue a certain culture.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1705844","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48890353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Towards a research agenda on how, when and why trust and distrust matter to coopetition","authors":"Angelos Kostis, M. Näsholm","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1692664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1692664","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Trust has been acknowledged as an important aspect of interorganizational relationships. Yet, limited attention has been paid to the importance of trust in the light of coopetitive interactions, i.e. simultaneously cooperating and competing. Research on trust has started to acknowledge that more trust may not always be better, and that trust and distrust are separate and distinct phenomena. Whilst coopetition research has mentioned the important role of trust, the potential role of distrust is even less acknowledged, although it may be particularly relevant due to the tensions, risks, and uncertainties involved. The purpose of this paper is to identify limitations and gaps in the extant literature on trust in coopetition, bring promising research opportunities into light, and create an agenda for future research focused on the roles of both trust and distrust in coopetition. By means of a systematic literature review, we find that the importance of trust in different phases of coopetition has been acknowledged by prior research, yet deeper explanations of how, when, and why different aspects of trust and distrust matter to coopetition are missing. A normative view on trust prevails and the potential fruitfulness of distrust is neglected. Based on these limitations, an agenda including six promising research avenues is constructed.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1692664","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45893972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"International variations in fiduciary and competence trust of physicians: A multilevel study","authors":"Robert R. Martin","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1684302","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1684302","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines how public trust in physicians varies across two primary dimensions: trust in physicians' technical competence and in their fiduciary duty to prioritise patients' interests above their own. While prior empirical studies explain variations in trust of physicians primarily by focusing on patients' individual characteristics, trust differences across national borders remain underexplored. This study utilises nationally representative survey data from 26 countries and data from national-level collections to investigate the correlates of both dimensions of trust. Multilevel ordinal logistic regression analysis reveals associations between the two dimensions of trust in physicians and a host of individual and national characteristics. The study reveals a complex relationship between trust and how countries fund health care delivery. Trust that physicians uphold their fiduciary duty to patients is significantly stronger in countries with predominantly tax-funded primary care systems. Conversely, both fiduciary trust and competence trust are weaker where out-of-pocket payments comprise a greater percentage of total health spending. Finally, individuals who report they are in better health are more likely to trust physicians.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1684302","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42395098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Communicating (about) trust","authors":"Guido Möllering","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2020.1804240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2020.1804240","url":null,"abstract":"It feels strange to introduce this issue of Journal of Trust Research (JTR) as its content was created before COVID-19 hit us all, but one is tempted to read it through a Corona lens. And, once aga...","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2020.1804240","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44231874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Trust in contemporary society","authors":"R. Bachmann","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2020.1723607","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2020.1723607","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2020.1723607","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43210440","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The concept of language of trust and trustworthiness: (Why) history matters","authors":"J. Wubs-Mrozewicz","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1689826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1689826","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper puts forward the argument that the concept of the language of trust and trustworthiness can be a useful way of understanding what trust means in specific situations. This concept refers to linguistic devices – verbal and non-verbal – which purposefully convey trust and create a foundation for continuing or improving relations. The concept has been developed based on research into relations between premodern merchants and their urban governments. In this context, the language of trust has emerged from historical sources as a tool which was used with great skill. By studying the form, the functions and the content of the language of trust in a concrete setting, contemporary or historical, we can grasp what can constitute the basis for trust and trustworthiness. The second argument proposed here is that, by pointing to the foundations of trust, the language of trust reveals the core values of an individual, a group or a society at a given time and place.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1689826","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49298551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"‘Jumper’ managers’ vulnerable involvement/avoidance and trust/distrust spirals","authors":"Reuven Shapira","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Earlier ascending/descending trust spirals have been explained by the job discretion allowed to employees by managers; few have studied such spirals as this has required a bi-directional longitudinal framework. Such a framework has used ethnographies of managers who ‘jumped’ from other organisations and suffered gaps of knowledge that curbed their psychological safety. Gap-exposing vulnerable involvement in locals’ deliberations would have been required for mutual trust building. These managers were mostly detached or autocratic and generated descending trust spirals which barred locals’ knowledge-sharing. In their ignorance they used immoral subterfuge, furthered distrust, shaped low-trust cultures, and mismanaged. However, detached/autocratic ‘jumpers’ often managed mediocrely by ‘riding’ on the successes of trusted vulnerably involved mid-levelers. Only a few ‘jumpers’ generated ascending mutual trust spirals by vulnerable involvement, learned from and with locals, and succeeded by shaping high-trust innovation-prone cultures. Contextual factors helped explain choices of practicing/avoiding vulnerable involvement and generating ascending/ descending trust spirals. Further study of these choices and these factors is suggested.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45737056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Putting a spotlight on the trustor in trust research","authors":"Guido Möllering","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1678853","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1678853","url":null,"abstract":"One important reason why trust and trustworthiness should not be confounded (e.g. Hardin, 2002) is that the latter focuses our attention mainly on the trustee and away from the trustor. Even when we are careful to talk about ‘perceived trustworthiness’ (e.g. Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995, p. 715, Figure 1, emphasis added) – which should convey that it is up to trustors to interpret any cues of trustworthiness – there is a tendency to see trust mainly as a result of the trustees’ given characteristics, especially the likelihood they will honour trust. Similarly, the ‘standard’ survey question used by psychologists, sociologists, political scientists, economists and others (see, e.g. Uslaner, 2015) to the present day asks respondents, if they think ‘most people can be trusted’. The question is thus phrased with reference to the trustee side, instead of checking the trustor side and probing, for example, if ‘most people are willing to trust’ or at least the respondents themselves are ‘mostly willing to trust’. Somewhat paradoxically, answers to the widely used ‘standard’ question are actually supposed to tell us something about the trustors answering (their propensity to trust, see also the comments on Patent & Searle, 2019 below) rather than about the actual trustworthiness of all those potential trustees out there. Who are ‘most people’ supposed to be in the first place (see Delhey, Newton, & Welzel, 2011 on the ‘radius of trust’ problem)? Still, the trustors’ (propensity to) trust is framed primarily as a matter of trustee trustworthiness, obscuring any other factors that might influence the trustors’ trustfulness and actual trusting actions. Trustworthiness and trustfulness go together, of course, especially if we do not merely see them as static dispositions but as dynamic accomplishments in trusting relationships. However, researchers tend to be preoccupied with trustworthiness. This has not always been so and it may well be the case that early trust research focused too much on trustors and individual traits that would explain their willingness to trust (Rotter, 1967; Wrightsman, 1966) so that later trust research went the other way and examined mainly the trustees’ incentives or inclinations to be trustworthy. Jones and Shah (2016) provide a very helpful analysis of how the ‘locus of trust’ may shift from trustor to trustee to dyadic influences, which unfortunately still refers mainly to the dimensions of perceived trustworthiness as the dependent variables instead of also devising a model of the trustor’s trustfulness. In this vein, Lu, Kong, Ferrin, and Dirks (2017) present evidence that trustor attributes, along with shared attributes but not trustee attributes, influence trust in negotiations. Hence I am glad to announce that the current issue of Journal of Trust Research (JTR) contains articles that put a spotlight on the trustor again. For sure they do a lot more than this and they all contribute various valuable insights beyond this","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1678853","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47857582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}