Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations
Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.104
复制
发表时间：
2004-02-01
影响因子：
9.9
通讯作者：
Dirks, KT
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kim, PH;Ferrin, DL;Dirks, KT
进行了两项研究，以考察道歉和拒绝在据称的违规行为后修复信任的含义。结果显示，当不信任的各方(A)为涉及权限事项的违规行为道歉，但对涉及诚信事项的违规行为否认有罪，以及(B)在随后有犯罪证据时为违规行为道歉，但在随后有无辜证据时否认侵权行为时，信任得到了更成功的修复。补充分析还发现，违规类型和违规反应对被试信任意图的交互作用是通过他们的信任信念来实现的。总而言之，这些发现提供了必要的洞察力和支持性证据，说明在发生违规行为后，信任可能会如何修复。
Two studies were conducted to examine the implications of an apology versus a denial for repairing trust after an alleged violation. Results reveal that trust was repaired more successfully when mistrusted parties (a) apologized for violations concerning matters of competence but denied culpability for violations concerning matters of integrity, and (b) had apologized for violations when there was subsequent evidence of guilt but had denied culpability for violations when there was subsequent evidence of innocence. Supplementary analyses also revealed that the interactive effects of violation type and violation response on participants' trusting intentions were mediated by their trusting beliefs. Combined, these findings provide needed insight and supporting evidence concerning how trust might be repaired in the aftermath of a violation.