1973
DOI: 10.1037/h0035734
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Attributing trust and conciliatory intent from coercive power capability.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
25
0
2

Year Published

1976
1976
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
25
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…If stakeholders perceive top managers to behave predominantly according to self-interested motives, they are unlikely to trust the managers. In contrast, if an attribution of benevolent intentions is made by the stakeholders, a trusting relationship will develop (Lindskold and Bennett, 1973). To the extent that top managers' benevolent values lead them to demonstrate genuine interest in the welfare of stakeholders and society and to the extent that the interpretation of such benevolent intentions by the stakeholders is facilitated, for example, through sufficient interactions between the two parties, stakeholders will experience affective attachments 352…”
Section: Managerial Values and Corporate Financial Performancementioning
confidence: 87%
“…If stakeholders perceive top managers to behave predominantly according to self-interested motives, they are unlikely to trust the managers. In contrast, if an attribution of benevolent intentions is made by the stakeholders, a trusting relationship will develop (Lindskold and Bennett, 1973). To the extent that top managers' benevolent values lead them to demonstrate genuine interest in the welfare of stakeholders and society and to the extent that the interpretation of such benevolent intentions by the stakeholders is facilitated, for example, through sufficient interactions between the two parties, stakeholders will experience affective attachments 352…”
Section: Managerial Values and Corporate Financial Performancementioning
confidence: 87%
“…Previous research has primarily examined promises in a prisoner's dilemma context (e.g. Lindskold & Bennett, 1973) or as an explanation for why group discussion increases cooperation (e.g. Orbell, Van de Kragt, & Dawes, 1988), but the current research is (at least to our knowledge) the first to show that within a step-level public good dilemma a promise to cooperate may play a role in one's desire to instal structural changes such as a democratic leader.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…As per Rotter (1967), "Trust is an expectancy held by an individual or a group that the word or promise of another individual or group can be relied upon." Lindskold and Bennett (1973) stated that trust includes learned expectancy and perceived motives. Trust occurs only if the other person is perceived as altruistic not selfish.…”
Section: Hope Trust and Positive Psychologymentioning
confidence: 99%