Deterrence-based trust in bargaining: Introducing a new experimental paradigm

IF 1.9 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Trust Research Pub Date : 2017-01-02 DOI:10.1080/21515581.2016.1254093
Eric van Dijk, Varia Makagonova, Erik W. De Kwaadsteniet, Manon Schutter
{"title":"Deterrence-based trust in bargaining: Introducing a new experimental paradigm","authors":"Eric van Dijk, Varia Makagonova, Erik W. De Kwaadsteniet, Manon Schutter","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2016.1254093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Trust, especially in the initial stages of trust building, is often assumed to be the result of deterrence-based trust. While theorising acknowledges its importance, research on deterrence-based trust has been scarce. To facilitate the investigation of the concept, we designed new versions of the trust game in which we studied both trust (Experiment 1) and trustworthiness (Experiment 2). To better model deterrence-based trust we extended a trust game with an additional phase where trustors could accept or reject the trustee’s distribution. We varied consequences of the rejection option as a delta bargaining game, thereby manipulating the potential for deterrence. The results showed that trustors were highly responsive to the possibility to reject the trustee’s distribution. Trustees, however, seemed largely unaffected and were generally highly trustworthy. Together these findings show how trust games can meaningfully be extended to assess the effect of deterrence-based trust in bargaining.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":"7 1","pages":"71 - 89"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2016.1254093","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trust Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2016.1254093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Trust, especially in the initial stages of trust building, is often assumed to be the result of deterrence-based trust. While theorising acknowledges its importance, research on deterrence-based trust has been scarce. To facilitate the investigation of the concept, we designed new versions of the trust game in which we studied both trust (Experiment 1) and trustworthiness (Experiment 2). To better model deterrence-based trust we extended a trust game with an additional phase where trustors could accept or reject the trustee’s distribution. We varied consequences of the rejection option as a delta bargaining game, thereby manipulating the potential for deterrence. The results showed that trustors were highly responsive to the possibility to reject the trustee’s distribution. Trustees, however, seemed largely unaffected and were generally highly trustworthy. Together these findings show how trust games can meaningfully be extended to assess the effect of deterrence-based trust in bargaining.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
议价中基于威慑的信任:引入一个新的实验范式
信任,特别是在信任建立的初始阶段,通常被认为是基于威慑的信任的结果。虽然理论化承认其重要性,但对基于威慑的信任的研究很少。为了便于对这一概念的研究,我们设计了新版本的信任博弈,其中我们研究了信任(实验1)和可信度(实验2)。为了更好地模拟基于威慑的信任,我们扩展了一个信任博弈,增加了一个额外的阶段,委托人可以接受或拒绝受托人的分配。我们将拒绝选项的各种后果作为delta讨价还价博弈,从而操纵潜在的威慑。结果表明,受托人对拒绝受托人分配的可能性反应强烈。然而,受托人似乎在很大程度上不受影响,而且通常是高度值得信赖的。综上所述,这些发现表明信任游戏可以有意义地扩展到评估基于威慑的信任在讨价还价中的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
42.90%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: As an inter-disciplinary and cross-cultural journal dedicated to advancing a cross-level, context-rich, process-oriented, and practice-relevant journal, JTR provides a focal point for an open dialogue and debate between diverse researchers, thus enhancing the understanding of trust in general and trust-related management in particular, especially in its organizational and social context in the broadest sense. Through both theoretical development and empirical investigation, JTR seeks to open the "black-box" of trust in various contexts.
期刊最新文献
Trust and distrust in public governance settings: Conceptualising and testing the link in regulatory relations. Capturing the conversation of trust research On the intricate relationship between data and theory, and the potential gain afforded by capturing very low levels of media trust: Commentary on Mangold (2024) Is security still the chiefest enemy? The challenges and contradictions in European confidence- and security-building in the Cold War Police legitimacy in the making: the underlying social forces for police legitimacy among religious communities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1