The time for transition: Future trust research

Li, Peter Ping

doi:10.1080/21515581.2017.1293772

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our model reflects recent calls to adopt a richer, context related, processual perspective to trust research (Lewis & Weigert, 2012;McEvily, 2011;Searle et al, 2018). We do so by incorporating contextual features of the interpersonal relationship in which trust occurs (Tomlinson, 2011). Thus far, consideration of the context of the relationship has been restricted to factors such as relationship tenure, shared similarity and reciprocation (Ferrin & Lyu, 2018).…”

Section: Trust Motivation: the Self-regulatory Processes Underlying Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, models which suggest that trust is a product of trustworthiness and trust propensity have significant difficulties in accounting for split second trust decisions (Willis & Todorov, 2006) or those which are made without sufficient logical evidence and thus appear to be irrational (e.g., Pillutla, Malhotra, & Murnighan, 2003). These models also fail to explain how visible behavior that violates trust expectations is overlooked (Robinson, 1996;Tomlinson, 2011) or how trust between untrustworthy individuals leads employees to act in the interests of a work relationship rather than self-or organizational interests (e.g., Aven, 2015). While these acts of trust may appear irrational through the lens of a rational-choice model, we argue that people may trust in these circumstances because of the motives and desires they pursue within their relationships.…”

Section: Trust Motivation: the Self-regulatory Processes Underlying Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the discrepancy feedback loop presents a mechanism for understanding how trust violations or changes in the external environment might be managed by the trustor and the processes involved in persisting with, or abandoning, the goal to trust. While theorists have recognized that every unmet trustworthiness expectation does not lead to breach (Jones & George, 1998;Luhmann, 1979), the factors that influence this process have not been fully explored (Tomlinson, 2011). Our model incorporates a role for intrapersonal (trust regulation), interpersonal (trust motivation drivers) and to a lesser extent wider contextual influences (via external disturbances) in influencing how unmet expectations and trust breaches might be processed.…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Trust motivation: The self-regulatory processes underlying trust decisions

Werff

Legood

Buckley

et al. 2019

Organizational Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theorizing about trust has focused predominantly on cognitive trust cues such as trustworthiness, portraying the trustor as a relatively passive observer reacting to the attributes of the other party. Using self-determination and control theories of motivation, we propose a model of trust motivation that explores the intraindividual processes involved in the volitional aspects of trust decision-making implied by the definition of trust as a willingness to be vulnerable. We distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic drivers of trust and propose a two-phase model of trust goal setting and trust regulation. Our model offers a dynamic view of the trusting process and a framework for understanding how trust cognition, affect and behavior interact over time. Furthermore, we discuss how trust goals may be altered or abandoned via a feedback loop during the trust regulation process. We conclude with a discussion of potential implications for existing theory and future research.

show abstract

Section: Trust Motivation: the Self-regulatory Processes Underlying Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Trust Motivation: the Self-regulatory Processes Underlying Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trust motivation: The self-regulatory processes underlying trust decisions

Werff

Legood

Buckley

et al. 2019

Organizational Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Especially when a relationship involves increased interdependence, risks, and uncertainty, the importance of trust is amplified (Das & Teng, 2004;Latusek & Vlaar, 2018;Li, 2012;McEvily, Perrone, & Zaheer, 2003;Schilke & Cook, 2015). Following this notion, Li (2017) has called for research that pays further attention to trust-as-choice under conditions of uncertainty and vulnerability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a research agenda on how, when and why trust and distrust matter to coopetition

Kostis

Näsholm

2019

Journal of Trust Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…A telling example is that the outgoing editor of the Journal of Trust Research that was established to advance knowledge on trust, characterises the areas where progress has been made during the first six years of the journal in terms of more sophisticated ways of addressing various dualisms and complexities (Li 2017). In other words, progress is more evident in the increased number of perspectives and the more refined way of understanding the dividing issues rather than in the form of shared knowledge.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust in International Relations

Haukkala

Wetering

Vuorelma

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust or at least the quest for it is present everywhere in human and social lifeand also in world politics. Although practitioners have almost always understood its importance, it has taken a long time for researchers to discoveror to some extent to rediscover-the concept of trust in the field of International Relations. There is now an expanding and forward-looking body of research on trust in IR that seeks to make analytical and theoretical sense of the concept, apply it to new empirical contexts as well as to solve explanatory puzzles with the help of the concept. This book is an excellent example of this growing trust research, representing a variety of perspectives and examining its significance via empirical case studies in International Relations. We can no longer depart from the assumption that trusting relations are marginal in world politics and that distrust is the natural point of departure for conducting international affairs. Instead, trust should be seen as a central and instrumental concept in tackling pressing problems from security to trade and environment that we are encountering in today's world shaped by suspicion and uncertainty. In short, where trust does not exist, we should think how to create trust in order to make human and social life better. Yet, having said this, there is still some work to do in order to place trust among the central concepts of the discipline. Trust is not, for example, listed as a key concept in International Relations in neither of the two edited volumes that discuss more than forty key concepts in the discipline (Diez, Bode and Fernandes da Costa 2011; Roach, Griffiths and O'Callaghan 2014). The key articles on trust in the field of the IR have gathered less than 100 citations (some even less than 10) in refereed journals. Neither is trust indexed as a key word in any of the several IR textbooks I surveyed.

show abstract

The time for transition: Future trust research

Cited by 12 publications

References 65 publications

Trust motivation: The self-regulatory processes underlying trust decisions

Trust motivation: The self-regulatory processes underlying trust decisions

Towards a research agenda on how, when and why trust and distrust matter to coopetition

Trust in International Relations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About