Repairing trust with individuals vs. groups

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 120, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 1-14

  Kim, Peter H ^a   Cooper, Cecily D ^b   Dirks, Kurt T ^c   Ferrin, Donald L ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^c WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST LOUIS   (United States)

^d SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Apology; Competence; Denial; Group; Integrity; Trust; Trust repair

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867295919     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Bagozzi R.P., Phillips L.W. Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic construal. Administrative Science Quarterly 1982, 27(3):459-489.
2. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory 1986, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
3. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51(6):1173-1182.
4. Bottom W.P., Gibson K., Daniels S., Murnighan J.K. When talk is not cheap: Substantive penance and expressions of intent in rebuilding cooperation. Organization Science 2002, 13(5):497-513.
5. Burt R.S., Knez M. Trust and third-party gossip. Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research 1996, 68-89. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. R.M. Kramer, T.R. Tyler (Eds.).
6. Cantano V.M., Darr W., Campbell C.A. Performance appraisal of behavior-based competencies: A reliable and valid procedure. Personnel Psychology 2007, 60(1):201-230.
7. Desmet P., De Cremer D., Van Dijk E. In money we trust? The use of financial compensations to repair trust in the aftermath of distributive harm. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2011, 114:75-86.
8. Dirks K.T., Kim P.H., Ferrin D.L., Cooper C.D. Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2011, 114:87-103.
9. Durkheim, E. (1886: 1973). On morality and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10. Ferrin D.L., Dirks K.T., Shah P.P. Direct and indirect effects of third party relationships on interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology 2006, 91(4):870-883.
11. Ferrin D.L., Kim P.H., Cooper C.D., Dirks K.T. Silence speaks volumes: The effectiveness of reticence in comparison to apology and denial for responding to integrity- and competence-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology 2007, 92(4):893-908.
12. Finkel E.J., Rusbult C.E., Kumashiro M., Hannon P.A. Dealing with betrayal in close relationships: Does commitment promote forgiveness?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2002, 82(6):956-974.
13. Granovetter M. Getting a job: A study in contacts and careers 1995, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 2nd ed.
14. Greitemeyer T., Schulz-Hardt S. Preference-consistent evaluation of information in the hidden profile paradigm: Beyond group-level explanations for the dominance of shared information in group decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, 84(2):322-339.
15. Gruenfeld D.H., Hollingshead A.B. The evolution of group integrative complexity and its relation to task performance. Small Group Research 1993, 24(3):383-405.
16. Gruenfeld D.H., Mannix E.A., Williams K.Y., Neale M.A. Group composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1996, 67(1):1-15.
17. Hatfield E., Cacioppo J.T., Rapson R.L. Emotional contagion 1994, Cambridge University Press, New York.
18. Hinsz V.B., Tindale R.S., Vollrath D.A. The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin 1997, 121(1):43-64.
19. Huberty C.J., Morris J.D. Multivariate analysis versus multiple univartiate analyses. Psychological Bulletin 1989, 105(2):302-308.
20. Insko C.A., Schopler J., Holyle R.H., Dardis G.J., Graetz K.A. Individual-group discontinuity as a function of fear and greed. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1990, 58(1):68-79.
21. Isenberg D.J. Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 50(6):1141-1151.
22. Kaplan M.F., Miller C.E. Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1987, 53(2):306-313.
23. Kelley H.H. The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist 1973, 28(2):107-128.
24. Kerr N.L., MacCoun R.J., Kramer G.P. Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups. Psychological Review 1996, 103(4):687-719.
25. Kerr N.L., Tindale R.S. Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology 2004, 55:623-655.
26. Kim P.H. Strategic timing in group negotiations: The implications of forced entry and forced exit for negotiators with unequal power. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1997, 71(3):263-286.
27. Kim P.H. When what you know can hurt you: A study of experiential effects on group discussion and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1997, 69(2):165-177.
28. Kim P.H. When private beliefs shape collective reality: The effects of co-worker expectations on group behavior and performance. Management Science 2003, 49(6):801-815.
29. Kim P.H., Diekmann K.A., Tenbrunsel A.E. Flattery may get you somewhere: The strategic implications of providing positive vs. negative feedback about ability vs. ethicality in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2003, 90(2):225-243.
30. Kim P.H., Dirks K.T., Cooper C.D. The repair of trust: A dynamic bilateral perspective and multilevel conceptualization. Academy of Management Review 2009, 34(3):401-422.
31. Kim P.H., Dirks K.T., Cooper C.D., Ferrin D.L. When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2006, 99:49-65.
32. Kim P.H., Ferrin D.L., Cooper C.D., Dirks K.T. Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology vs. denial for repairing ability- vs. integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology 2004, 89(1):104-118.
33. Kim P.H., Pinkley R.L., Fragale A.R. Power dynamics in negotiation. Academy of Management Review 2005, 30(4):799-822.
34. Kramer R.M., Lewicki R.J. Repairing and enhancing trust: Approaches to reducing organizational trust deficits. Academy of Management Annals 2010, 4:245-277.
35. Laughlin P.R., Bonner B.L., Miner A.G. Groups perform better than the best individuals on letters-to-numbers problems. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2002, 88(2):605-620.
36. Lount R.B., Zhong C.-B., Sivanathan N., Murnighan J.K. Getting off on the wrong foot: The timing of a breach and the restoration of trust. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2008, 34:1601-1612.
37. Mannix E.A. The influence of power, distribution norms and task meeting structure on resource allocation in small group negotiation. The International Journal of Conflict Management 1993, 4(1):5-23.
38. Mayer R.C., Davis J.H., Schoorman F.D. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review 1995, 20(3):709-734.
39. McKnight D.H., Cummings L.L., Chervany N.L. Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review 1998, 23(3):473-490.
40. Meier B.P., Hinsz V.B. A comparison of human aggression commited by groups and individuals: An interindividual-intergroup discontinuity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2004, 40:551-559.
41. Milch K.F., Weber E.U., Appelt K.C., Handgraaf M.J.J., Krantz D.H. From individual preference construction to group decisions: Framing effects and group processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2009, 108:242-255.
42. Moon H., Conlon D.E., Humphrey S.E., Quigley N., Devers C.E., Nowakowski J.M. Group decision process and incrementalism in organizational decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2003, 92:67-79.
43. Preacher K.J., Hayes A.F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavioral Research Methods 2008, 40(3):879-891.
44. Reeder G.D., Brewer M.B. A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review 1979, 86(1):61-79.
45. Reeder G.D., Hesson-McInnis M., Krohse J.O., Scialabba E.A. Inferences about effort and ability. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2001, 27(9):1225-1235.
46. Reeder G.D., Kumar S., Hesson-McInnis M.S., Trafimow D. Inferences about the morality of an aggressor: The role of perceived motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2002, 83(4):789-803.
47. Rousseau D.M., Sitkin S.B., Burt R.S., Camerer C. Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review 1998, 23:393-404.
48. Schweitzer M.E., Hershey J.C., Bradlow E.T. Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2006, 101(1):1-19.
49. Stasser G., Stewart D.D., Wittenbaum G.M. Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1995, 31:244-265.
50. Thompson L., Kim P.H. Why you should put on a happy face: Third party reactions to negotiator emotions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 2000, 6(1):3-14.
51. Tomlinson E.C., Dineen B.R., Lewicki R.J. The road to reconciliation: Antecedents of victim willingness to reconcile following a broken promise. Journal of Management 2004, 30(2):165-187.
52. Tomlinson E.C., Mayer R.C. The role of causal attribution dimensions in trust repair. Academy of Management Review 2009, 34:85-104.
53. Williams K.D., Karau S.J. Social loafing and social compensation: The effects of expectations of co-worker performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1991, 61(4):570-581.