Cognition is a matter of trust: Distrust tunes cognitive processes

Mayo, Ruth

doi:10.1080/10463283.2015.1117249

Cited by 76 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 152 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Corbitt et al, 2003;Liew et al, 2017) argues for trust being critical for consumers' patronage behavior. The current study suggests that cognitivebased trust (also referred to as social distrust by Hill and O'Hara, 2006;Mayo, 2015) and affective-based trust breaches are distinct from behavior and behavioral intent.…”

Section: Evaluation Of the Impact Of The Trustworthiness Dimensions Omentioning

confidence: 75%

“…In the psychology literature (Mayo, 2015), compromise within cognitive-based trust is referred to as alternative cognitions. People tend to "switch" or "swap" important trustworthiness dimensions based on alternative benefits available to them in a given scenario (Mayo, 2015). This results in a cognitive-based distrust mind-set being very fluid and context based, as well as consumer specific.…”

Section: Evaluation Of the Impact Of The Trustworthiness Dimensions Omentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Service brand rehab: diagnosing trust repair mechanisms

Bolat

Robson

Sit

et al. 2020

QMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to understand consumers’ response to the trust repair mechanisms adopted by corporate brands in a service sector context following prominent trust damaging organizational transgressions. Design/methodology/approach Adopting a qualitative approach, six focus group discussions are used to investigate three high-profile consumer trust erosion cases within the service sector. Findings Consumer trust varies by context. Despite the severity of trust damage, corporate brands can recover trust towards their brands amongst consumers not directly affected by transgressions. Not all trust repair mechanisms are equally applicable to all service contexts, and re-branding could be used as a trust repair mechanism. Corporate brands in the service sector should focus on sense-making, relational approaches and transparency. Orchestration of trust repair mechanisms needs to be integrated within the trust rehabilitation processes. Research limitations/implications This study illustrates it is important to reconsider trust repair processes to accommodate context and integrate post-transgression consumer research. Practical implications Successful corporate brand rehabilitation of consumer trust requires examination of the trustworthiness dimensions consumers express before and after the transgression to select the most appropriate trust repair mechanisms. Findings suggest organizations also have preventative trust repair management programs. Originality/value This research is the first to empirically apply the conceptual framework of Bachmann et al. (2015) to explore consumer responses to the trust repair mechanisms adopted by corporate brands by context.

show abstract

Section: Evaluation Of the Impact Of The Trustworthiness Dimensions Omentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Evaluation Of the Impact Of The Trustworthiness Dimensions Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Service brand rehab: diagnosing trust repair mechanisms

Bolat

Robson

Sit

et al. 2020

QMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When receivers become suspicious, they search for player signals (e.g., Fein, ; Packard et al, ) and use reasoning (e.g., Fein, McCloskey, & Tomlinson, ; Mayo, ) to make inferences about trustworthiness (Campbell & Kirmani, ; Packard et al, ). These player signals can also generate product signals.…”

Section: Sellermentioning

confidence: 99%

How online word‐of‐mouth impacts receivers

Moore

Lafreniere

2019

Consumer Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online word‐of‐mouth (WOM) can impact consumers’ product evaluations, purchase intentions, and choices—but when does it do so? How do those receiving WOM know whether to rely on a particular message? This article suggests that the multiple players involved in online WOM (receivers, senders, sellers, platforms, and other consumers) each have their own interests, which are often in conflict. Thus, receivers of WOM are faced with a judgment task in deciding what information to rely on: They must make inferences about the product in question and about the players who provide or present WOM. To do so, they use signals embedded in various components of WOM, such as average star ratings, message content, or sender characteristics. The product and player information provided by these signals shapes the impact of WOM by allowing receivers to make inferences about (a) their likelihood of product satisfaction, and (b) the trustworthiness of WOM players, and therefore the trustworthiness of their content. This article summarizes how each player changes the impact of online WOM, providing a lens for understanding the current literature in online WOM, offering insights for theory in this context, and opening up pathways for future research.

show abstract

“…In other words, they are part of the task and not a social comparison target. This remark also applies to research showing that distrust increases the use of disconfirmatory strategies in rule discovery (Mayo, 2015). Indeed, it could be argued that competitors are sources of distrust to the extent that they hold negatively interdependent goals in relation to the reasoner.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Confirmation as coping with competition

Butera

Sommet

Toma

2018

European Review of Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Confirmation is a widespread tendency to seek, use, interpret or remember information in such a way as to corroborate one's hypothesis. We review various conceptions of confirmation and classify them as a function of whether they depict this phenomenon as a cognitive failure, a form of motivational prioritisation, or a pragmatic strategy. Then, we note that such a systematic and pervasive phenomenon must be a central mechanism of human activity serving an important and specific social function. We propose that confirmation is an adaptive mechanism that serves the function of coping with competitive situations. This general proposition is broken down into three implications: Confirmation occurs to a larger extent (1) when there is competition, (2) when competition is threatening, (3) when competition threatens one's feelings of competence. A research programme is reported to illustrate each of these implications.

show abstract

Cognition is a matter of trust: Distrust tunes cognitive processes

Cited by 76 publications

References 152 publications

Service brand rehab: diagnosing trust repair mechanisms

Service brand rehab: diagnosing trust repair mechanisms

How online word‐of‐mouth impacts receivers

Confirmation as coping with competition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About