Trust and reciprocity decisions: The differing perspectives of trustors and trusted parties

By Deepak Malhotra. 2004

235 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Demography, Safety Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fb1d5ef59a4b8f1cc9526d662bcf143691ed69d5

How researchers see this paper

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

In Demography

1. Benjamin E. Hilbig
2. Isabel Thielmann
3. Anthony M. Evans
4. Joachim I. Krueger
5. Eric van Dijk
6. Eveline A. Crone
7. M. Westenberg
8. Wouter van den Bos

In Safety Research

1. Isabel Thielmann
2. Benjamin E. Hilbig
3. Maurice E. Schweitzer
4. E. Levine
5. Joachim I. Krueger
6. Anthony M. Evans
7. Max H. Bazerman
8. Deepak Malhotra

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Isabel Thielmann
2. Benjamin E. Hilbig
3. Maurice E. Schweitzer
4. Joachim I. Krueger
5. Anthony M. Evans
6. Max H. Bazerman
7. Deepak Malhotra
8. E. Levine

Citations in the corpus

• Elements of trust: Risk and perspective-taking (2011, background): “Previous research did not pit risk against temptation (Malhotra, 2004; Snijders & Keren, 1999).”
• Human Resource Systems and Helping in Organizations: A Relational Perspective (2011, background): “Trust development is perhaps the principal mechanism for this purpose (e.g., Malhotra, 2004; Sheppard & Sherman, 1998), making it critical for successful helping exchanges.”
• Development of Trust and Reciprocity in Adolescence. (2010, methodology): “Both trust and reciprocity as defined here are hypothesized to require social perspective-taking abilities, in order to recognize the intentions of the trustor and predict whether the trusted person is likely to reciprocate (Pillutla, Malhotra & Murnighan, 2003; Malhotra, 2004).”
• Feeling trusted by business leaders in China: Antecedents and the mediating role of value congruence (2007, background): “two journal articles on the reactions of trusted parties in experimental settings (Malhotra, 2004; Pillutla, Malhotra, & Murnighan, 2003), database searches using the terms “felt trust,” “trusted parties,” and “trusted other” showed no prior publication.”
• Survey and behavioral measurements of interpersonal trust (2008, background): “Empirical evidence shows that players in the Investment Game are sensitive to this ratio (Malhotra, 2004; Snijders & Keren, 2001).”
• The Psychology (and Economics) of Trust (2009, background): “Malhotra (2004) also found that players interpreted the behavior of others in moral terms.”
• Trust: An Integrative Review from a Person–Situation Perspective (2015, background): “(Baier, 1986; Bohnet & Zeckhauser, 2004; J. Dunn, 1988; Dunning & Fetchenhauer, 2010, 2011; Evans & Krueger, 2011; Fehr, 2009; Hong & Bohnet, 2007; Malhotra, 2004; Mayer et al., 1995; Ross & LaCroix, 1996; Rousseau et al., 1998; Zand, 1972) Betrayal sensitivity Individuals might differ in their weig”
• Trust in Forecast Information Sharing (2011, background): “Snijders and Keren (1999) and Malhotra (2004) claim that trusting actions and cooperation between two parties are more likely to occur when the potential loss associated with trusting decreases.”
• Prosocial Lies: When Deception Breeds Trust (2014, background): “, 2004; Mayer & Davis, 1999), to rely on someone’s word (Johnson-George & Swap, 1982; Rotter, 1971), and to expose oneself to financial risk (Berg et al., 1995; Glaeser et al., 2000; Malhotra, 2004; Malhotra & Murnighan, 2002; McCabe et al., 2003; Pillutla et al., 2003; Schweitzer et al., 2006).”
• Status and Distrust: The Relevance of Inequality and Betrayal Aversion (2007, unknown): “…vulnerability has focused on the first vulnerability component , a person's attitude toward risk, both theoretically (e.g., Ben-Ner & Putterman, 2001; Cook & Cooper, 2003; Luhmann, 1979) as well as experimentally (e.g., Eckel & Wilson, 2004; Malhotra, 2004; Schechter, 2003; Snijders & Keren, 1999).”
• Psychological Influence in Negotiation: An Introduction Long Overdue (2008, background): “If the influencer has incurred a cost or provided a benefit to the target (cf. Malhotra, 2004), we are in the realm of economic influence.”
• NORMAL ACTS OF IRRATIONAL TRUST: MOTIVATED ATTRIBUTIONS AND THE TRUST DEVELOPMENT PROCESS (2004, background): “In contrast, our model builds on the ideas that parties view their choices and their interaction from differing perspectives (Malhotra, 2004) and that idiosyncratic and self-serving motivations shape their perceptions and attributions of each other.”