• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

诊断信任根源:从时间角度看待信任方、受托方以及对可感知可信度的双边影响。

Diagnosing the locus of trust: A temporal perspective for trustor, trustee, and dyadic influences on perceived trustworthiness.

机构信息

Department of Strategic Management and Entrepreneurship, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota.

Department of Work and Organization, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota.

出版信息

J Appl Psychol. 2016 Mar;101(3):392-414. doi: 10.1037/apl0000041. Epub 2015 Sep 7.

DOI:10.1037/apl0000041
PMID:26348476
Abstract

Extant trust research champions 3 different centers of action that determine perceptions of trust: the trustor (the individual rendering trust judgments), the trustee (the party being trusted), and the trustor-trustee dyad. We refer to the centers of action as loci of trust. Thus far, researchers have investigated determinants residing within each locus independently but have not concurrently investigated all 3 loci. Thus, the relative influence of each locus on perceptions of trust is unknown. Nor is it known how the influence of each locus changes with time. Where is the dominant locus of trust? And how does it change over time? We address these questions by examining the influence of trustors, trustees, and dyads on perceived ability, benevolence, and integrity. We find that trustor influence decreases over time while trustee and dyadic influences increase. We also find that the trustor is the dominant locus for perceived ability, benevolence, and integrity initially, but over time the trustee becomes the dominant locus for perceived ability and integrity. For perceived benevolence, the trustor remains the dominant driver over time.

摘要

现有信任研究支持 3 个不同的行动中心,这些中心决定了信任感知:信任方(做出信任判断的个人)、受托方(被信任的一方)和信任方-受托方二元体。我们将这些行动中心称为信任的位置。到目前为止,研究人员已经独立地研究了每个位置内的决定因素,但没有同时研究所有 3 个位置。因此,每个位置对信任感知的影响是未知的。也不知道每个位置的影响随时间如何变化。信任的主要位置在哪里?它如何随时间变化?我们通过检查信任方、受托方和二元体对感知能力、善意和正直的影响来回答这些问题。我们发现,信任方的影响随时间而降低,而受托方和二元体的影响则增加。我们还发现,信任方最初是感知能力、善意和正直的主要位置,但随着时间的推移,受托方成为感知能力和正直的主要位置。对于感知善意,信任方始终是主要驱动力。

相似文献

1
Diagnosing the locus of trust: A temporal perspective for trustor, trustee, and dyadic influences on perceived trustworthiness.诊断信任根源:从时间角度看待信任方、受托方以及对可感知可信度的双边影响。
J Appl Psychol. 2016 Mar;101(3):392-414. doi: 10.1037/apl0000041. Epub 2015 Sep 7.
2
Framing a trust game as a power game greatly affects interbrain synchronicity between trustor and trustee.将信任游戏构建为权力游戏会极大地影响信任方和受托方之间的大脑同步性。
Soc Neurosci. 2019 Dec;14(6):635-648. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2019.1566171. Epub 2019 Jan 22.
3
The Effect of Trustor Age and Trustee Age on Trustworthiness Judgments: An Event-Related Potential Study.委托者年龄和受托者年龄对可信度判断的影响:一项事件相关电位研究。
Front Aging Neurosci. 2022 Mar 9;14:815482. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.815482. eCollection 2022.
4
Understanding Trust Determinants in a Live Chat Service on Familial Cancer: Qualitative Triangulation Study With Focus Groups and Interviews in Germany.理解家庭癌症在线聊天服务中的信任决定因素:德国焦点小组和访谈的定性三角研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Aug 23;25:e44707. doi: 10.2196/44707.
5
Electrodes as social glue: measuring heart rate promotes giving in the trust game.电极充当社会黏合剂:测量心率可促进信任游戏中的施舍行为。
Int J Psychophysiol. 2011 Jun;80(3):246-50. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.03.007. Epub 2011 Mar 21.
6
The Impact of Third-Party Information on Trust: Valence, Source, and Reliability.第三方信息对信任的影响:效价、来源与可靠性
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 16;11(2):e0149542. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149542. eCollection 2016.
7
How and why humans trust: A meta-analysis and elaborated model.人类如何以及为何信任:一项元分析及详尽模型
Front Psychol. 2023 Mar 27;14:1081086. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1081086. eCollection 2023.
8
What motivates repayment? Neural correlates of reciprocity in the Trust Game.是什么促使人们偿还?信任博弈中互惠行为的神经关联。
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2009 Sep;4(3):294-304. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsp009. Epub 2009 Mar 20.
9
Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust.第三方关系对人际信任的直接和间接影响。
J Appl Psychol. 2006 Jul;91(4):870-83. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.870.
10
Conceptualization and Measurement of Trust in Home-School Contexts: A Scoping Review.家校情境中信任的概念化与测量:一项范围综述
Front Psychol. 2021 Nov 26;12:742917. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.742917. eCollection 2021.

引用本文的文献

1
Investigating multidimensional organisational trust through breach.通过违规行为调查多维组织信任。
Aust J Psychol. 2023 Oct 4;75(1):2260498. doi: 10.1080/00049530.2023.2260498. eCollection 2023.
2
Teacher punishment intensity and parental trust in rural China: a moderated mediation of violation severity and trustworthiness.中国农村地区教师惩罚强度与家长信任:违规严重程度和可信度的调节中介作用
Front Psychol. 2025 May 21;16:1572656. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1572656. eCollection 2025.
3
Developing trustworthy artificial intelligence: insights from research on interpersonal, human-automation, and human-AI trust.
开发值得信赖的人工智能:来自人际信任、人机自动化信任和人类与人工智能信任研究的见解。
Front Psychol. 2024 Apr 17;15:1382693. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1382693. eCollection 2024.
4
"I Think You Are Trustworthy, Need I Say More?" The Factor Structure and Practicalities of Trustworthiness Assessment.“我认为你值得信赖,还需要多说吗?”可信度评估的因素结构与实际情况
Front Psychol. 2022 Apr 1;13:797443. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.797443. eCollection 2022.
5
Inferring signs from purposeful samples: The role of context in competency assessment.从有目的的样本中推断特征:情境在能力评估中的作用。
Med Educ. 2022 Jan;56(1):117-126. doi: 10.1111/medu.14669. Epub 2021 Oct 5.
6
Assessing Two Dimensions of Interpersonal Trust: Other-Focused Trust and Propensity to Trust.评估人际信任的两个维度:他人导向型信任和信任倾向。
Front Psychol. 2021 Jul 27;12:654735. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.654735. eCollection 2021.
7
Increasing Integrative Negotiation in European Organizations Through Trustworthiness and Trust.通过可信度与信任在欧洲组织中增强整合性谈判。
Front Psychol. 2021 Jun 23;12:655448. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655448. eCollection 2021.
8
Prediction of trust propensity from intrinsic brain morphology and functional connectome.从内在大脑形态和功能连接组预测信任倾向。
Hum Brain Mapp. 2021 Jan;42(1):175-191. doi: 10.1002/hbm.25215. Epub 2020 Oct 1.