Measuring inter-organizational trust—a critical review of the empirical research in 1990–2003

557 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Measuring trust in organisational research: Review and recommendations (2011, background): “Whereas Dietz and Den Hartog (2006) review 14 studies on trust in the intra-organisational context, Seppänen et al. (2007) limit their focus to 15 studies on trust in the interorganisational context.”
The Biology of Trust: Integrating Evidence From Genetics, Endocrinology, and Functional Brain Imaging (2012, background): “) Although behavioral trust research has revealed a number of insights into the nature of trust, as well as its antecedents and consequences (Rousseau et al., 1998; Seppänen et al., 2007; Swan et al., 1999), scholars have also started to investigate the topic from a biological perspective during the”
Fundamental transformations of trust and its drivers: A multi-stage approach of business-to-business relationships (2017, background): “For example, to overcome issues of causality that arise in static trust studies (Seppänen et al., 2007), research might account for the evolving nature of trust.”
A dyadic approach to the impact of differences in organizational culture on relationship performance (2009, background): “Trust has been found to have a positive effect on inter-firm cooperative performance as well, and by now a substantial body of literature exists on trust (e.g. Mohr & Spekman, 1994; Zaheer, McEvily, & Perrone, 1998; Nooteboom, 2002; see Seppänen et al., 2007 for an overview).”