Trust Across Culture and Context

IF 2.2 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making Pub Date : 2018-11-21 DOI:10.1177/1555343418810936
H. Klein, Mei-Hua Lin, Norma L. Miller, L. Militello, J. Lyons, Jessica G. Finkeldey
{"title":"Trust Across Culture and Context","authors":"H. Klein, Mei-Hua Lin, Norma L. Miller, L. Militello, J. Lyons, Jessica G. Finkeldey","doi":"10.1177/1555343418810936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trust assessment can be difficult during cross-cultural social and professional interactions. Structured interviews were used to contrast how young adults from three culturally distinct samples evaluate trustworthiness: Malaysia (Chinese), an Asian group; Panama, a Latin American group; and the United States, a Western group. The role of context in trust judgments (e.g., school, work, social encounters, encounters with strangers, encounters with danger) on the assessment of trustworthiness was examined. Findings affirm the importance of Mayer’s constructs of ability, benevolence, and integrity—but benevolence and integrity appeared more often than expected in the U.S. sample and less often than expected in the Chinese/Malaysian sample. Hofstede’s power distance variable was frequently cited by the Chinese/Malaysian sample and less often by the U.S. sample. H. A. Klein’s cultural lens model includes affect, cited most by the Panamanians; nonverbal communication, cited least by the U.S. and most by the Chinese/Malaysian samples; and dialectical reasoning, cited most by the Chinese/Malaysian sample and hardly at all by the U.S. sample. The results document the important role of context for assessing trust. These results illustrate the risks of assuming that other cultures make judgments such as trust assessments the way that Western cultures do.","PeriodicalId":46342,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making","volume":"13 1","pages":"10 - 29"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1555343418810936","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343418810936","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Trust assessment can be difficult during cross-cultural social and professional interactions. Structured interviews were used to contrast how young adults from three culturally distinct samples evaluate trustworthiness: Malaysia (Chinese), an Asian group; Panama, a Latin American group; and the United States, a Western group. The role of context in trust judgments (e.g., school, work, social encounters, encounters with strangers, encounters with danger) on the assessment of trustworthiness was examined. Findings affirm the importance of Mayer’s constructs of ability, benevolence, and integrity—but benevolence and integrity appeared more often than expected in the U.S. sample and less often than expected in the Chinese/Malaysian sample. Hofstede’s power distance variable was frequently cited by the Chinese/Malaysian sample and less often by the U.S. sample. H. A. Klein’s cultural lens model includes affect, cited most by the Panamanians; nonverbal communication, cited least by the U.S. and most by the Chinese/Malaysian samples; and dialectical reasoning, cited most by the Chinese/Malaysian sample and hardly at all by the U.S. sample. The results document the important role of context for assessing trust. These results illustrate the risks of assuming that other cultures make judgments such as trust assessments the way that Western cultures do.
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
跨文化和背景的信任
在跨文化的社会和专业互动中,信任评估可能是困难的。结构化访谈用于对比来自三个不同文化样本的年轻人如何评估可信度:马来西亚(华人),一个亚洲群体;巴拿马,一个拉丁美洲集团;而美国是一个西方集团。考察了环境在信任判断(如学校、工作、社会遭遇、与陌生人的遭遇、与危险的遭遇)中对可信度评估的作用。研究结果肯定了Mayer的能力、仁慈和正直结构的重要性,但仁慈和正直在美国样本中出现的频率高于预期,而在中国/马来西亚样本中出现的频率低于预期。Hofstede的权力距离变量经常被中国/马来西亚样本引用,而较少被美国样本引用。H. A. Klein的文化透镜模型包括巴拿马人引用最多的情感;非语言沟通,美国人引用最少,中国/马来西亚人引用最多;辩证推理,被中国/马来西亚的样本引用最多,而几乎没有被美国的样本引用。结果证明了环境对评估信任的重要作用。这些结果表明,假设其他文化以西方文化的方式做出信任评估等判断是有风险的。
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
4.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Is the Pull-Down Effect Overstated? An Examination of Trust Propagation Among Fighter Pilots in a High-Fidelity Simulation A Taxonomy for AI Hazard Analysis Understanding Automation Failure Integrating Function Allocation and Operational Event Sequence Diagrams to Support Human-Robot Coordination: Case Study of a Robotic Date Thinning System Adapting Cognitive Task Analysis Methods for Use in a Large Sample Simulation Study of High-Risk Healthcare Events.
×
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