• 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

关于第一印象、破碎的信任与道歉:对人际信任和团队动态的影响。

Of first impressions, shattered trust, and apology: impact on interpersonal trust and team dynamics.

作者信息

Maliqi Majlinda, Lalot Fanny, Quiamzade Alain

机构信息

Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Universite de Geneve, Geneva, Switzerland.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2025 Aug 7;16:1654463. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1654463. eCollection 2025.

DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1654463
PMID:40851628
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12369420/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate the dynamics of trust formation in the work context. Specifically, the study aims to test how first impressions and new information about a new team member (1) interact to determine interpersonal trust in this person, and (2) influence perceptions of the wider work team.

METHODS

We present the findings of a preregistered experimental study conducted amongst employees in Northwestern Switzerland ( = 204). We relied on a hiring paradigm, using a bogus job interview video to manipulate first impressions of a job candidate through her response to an accusation of past trust violation (denial vs. apology). This was followed by new positive information about the job candidate. Outcomes included the perceived trustworthiness of, and trust in the job candidate, as well as the anticipated team dynamics if the person were to join the participant's work team.

RESULTS

Contradicting a congruence bias hypothesis, the results showed a sustained positive effect of first impressions (specifically, the impact of apology over denial), demonstrating an additive, rather than multiplicative, positive effect of the new information on (1) perceived trustworthiness and interpersonal trust as well as (2) collaborative culture, perceived performance, and satisfaction with team functioning.

DISCUSSION

We highlight theoretical implications for belief updating research and suggest applications for trust interventions in the workplace.

摘要

引言

本研究旨在探讨工作环境中信任形成的动态过程。具体而言,该研究旨在测试关于新团队成员的第一印象和新信息如何:(1)相互作用以确定对该人的人际信任,以及(2)影响对更广泛工作团队的看法。

方法

我们展示了一项在瑞士西北部员工中进行的预注册实验研究的结果( = 204)。我们采用了招聘范式,通过一个虚假的求职面试视频,根据求职者对过去信任违规指控的回应(否认与道歉)来操纵对求职者的第一印象。随后提供了关于该求职者的新的积极信息。结果包括对求职者的可信赖度和信任度的感知,以及如果此人加入参与者的工作团队,对预期团队动态的看法。

结果

与一致性偏差假设相反,结果显示第一印象具有持续的积极影响(具体而言,道歉比否认的影响更大),表明新信息对(1)感知到的可信赖度和人际信任,以及(2)协作文化、感知到的绩效和对团队功能的满意度具有累加而非倍增的积极影响。

讨论

我们强调了对信念更新研究的理论意义,并提出了在工作场所进行信任干预的应用建议。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/7b177ba00475/fpsyg-16-1654463-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/8c18bf22b3ad/fpsyg-16-1654463-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/cf79fccd5332/fpsyg-16-1654463-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/450abcdc3823/fpsyg-16-1654463-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/7b177ba00475/fpsyg-16-1654463-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/8c18bf22b3ad/fpsyg-16-1654463-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/cf79fccd5332/fpsyg-16-1654463-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/450abcdc3823/fpsyg-16-1654463-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/449c/12369420/7b177ba00475/fpsyg-16-1654463-g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Of first impressions, shattered trust, and apology: impact on interpersonal trust and team dynamics.关于第一印象、破碎的信任与道歉:对人际信任和团队动态的影响。
Front Psychol. 2025 Aug 7;16:1654463. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1654463. eCollection 2025.
2
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训
3
The Effect of Labeling During Simulated Contact on Attitudes Toward Autistic Adults.模拟接触过程中的标签对对待成年自闭症患者态度的影响。
Autism Adulthood. 2025 Feb 5;7(1):93-99. doi: 10.1089/aut.2023.0081. eCollection 2025 Feb.
4
Patient buy-in to social prescribing through link workers as part of person-centred care: a realist evaluation.患者通过联络人员接受社会处方作为以患者为中心的护理的一部分:一项现实主义评价。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Sep 25:1-17. doi: 10.3310/ETND8254.
5
The Lived Experience of Autistic Adults in Employment: A Systematic Search and Synthesis.成年自闭症患者的就业生活经历:系统检索与综述
Autism Adulthood. 2024 Dec 2;6(4):495-509. doi: 10.1089/aut.2022.0114. eCollection 2024 Dec.
6
How Do Individuals Perceive Diagnostic Labels and Explanations for Hip Pain? A Qualitative Study Among Adults With Persistent Hip Pain.个体如何看待髋关节疼痛的诊断标签和解释?一项针对持续性髋关节疼痛成年人的定性研究。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Mar 5. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003445.
7
Does personal relevance moderate communication effects? The example of risk communication about 5G-related electromagnetic fields.个人关联性会调节沟通效果吗?以5G相关电磁场的风险沟通为例。
Open Res Eur. 2025 May 23;5:13. doi: 10.12688/openreseurope.19236.2. eCollection 2025.
8
Implementation of link workers in primary care: Synopsis of findings from a realist evaluation.基层医疗中联络人员的实施:现实主义评价的结果概要
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Jul;13(27):1-30. doi: 10.3310/KHGT9993.
9
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks管制药品的处方:益处与风险
10
Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing job loss in workers with inflammatory arthritis.预防炎性关节炎患者失业的非药物干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Nov 6;2014(11):CD010208. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010208.pub2.

本文引用的文献

1
Are there dominant response tendencies for social reactions? Trust trumps mistrust-evidence from a Dominant Behavior Measure (DBM).对于社会反应是否存在主导反应倾向?信任胜过不信任——来自主导行为测量(DBM)的证据。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2023 Jul;125(1):57-81. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000334. Epub 2023 Jan 12.
2
Feeling negative or positive about fresh blood? Understanding veterans' affective reactions toward newcomer entry in teams from an affective events perspective.对新鲜血液持消极或积极态度?从情感事件角度理解退伍军人对团队中新人加入的情感反应。
J Appl Psychol. 2023 May;108(5):728-749. doi: 10.1037/apl0001044. Epub 2022 Sep 15.
3
"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.
4
Digitally transformed home office impacts on job satisfaction, job stress and job productivity. COVID-19 findings.数字化转型的家庭办公对工作满意度、工作压力和工作效率的影响。COVID-19 的发现。
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 10;17(3):e0265131. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265131. eCollection 2022.
5
False prophets and Cassandra's curse: The role of credibility in belief updating.假先知与卡珊德拉的诅咒:可信度在信念更新中的作用。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2020 Jan;202:102956. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102956. Epub 2019 Nov 30.
6
New recommendations for testing indirect effects in mediational models: The need to report and test component paths.中介模型中间接效应检验的新建议:报告和检验组成路径的必要性。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2018 Dec;115(6):929-943. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000132.
7
Trusting outgroup, but not ingroup members, requires control: neural and behavioral evidence.信任外群体成员而非内群体成员需要自控:神经学及行为学证据。
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2017 Mar 1;12(3):372-381. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsw139.
8
Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators.信任在虚拟团队中更重要吗?一项考虑虚拟性和文件记录作为调节变量的信任和团队有效性的元分析。
J Appl Psychol. 2016 Aug;101(8):1151-77. doi: 10.1037/apl0000113. Epub 2016 May 26.
9
Trust and team performance: A meta-analysis of main effects, moderators, and covariates.信任与团队绩效:主效应、调节变量和协变量的元分析。
J Appl Psychol. 2016 Aug;101(8):1134-50. doi: 10.1037/apl0000110. Epub 2016 Apr 28.
10
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.