The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.
Haidt, J. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.4.814 · Cited by 8,048
The processes of causal attribution.
Kelley, H. H. (1973) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0034225 · Cited by 4,025
Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A Holistic Construal
Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392322 · Cited by 2,064
Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies.
Latane, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0026570 · Cited by 1,252
A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception.
Reeder, G. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1979) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.86.1.61 · Cited by 723
Conceptual and methodological considerations in the study of trust and suspicion
Kee, H. W., & Knox, R. E. (1970) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/002200277001400307 · Cited by 523
In search of the powerful self-fulfilling prophecy
Madon, S., Jussim, L., & Eccles, J. (1997) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.4.791 · Cited by 304
The Structure of Interpersonal Trust in the Workplace
Schindler, P. L., & Thomas, C. C. (1993) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1993.73.2.563 · Cited by 136
Cited by
Building Better Causal Theories: A Fuzzy Set Approach to Typologies in Organization Research
Fiss, P. C. (2011) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2011.60263120 · Cited by 5,930
Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns
Fogel, J., & Nehmad, E. (2009) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.006 · Cited by 987
At What Level (and in Whom) We Trust: Trust Across Multiple Organizational Levels
Fulmer, C. A., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206312439327 · Cited by 886
Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents.
de Visser, E. J., Monfort, S. S., McKendrick, R., Smith, M. A. B., McKnight, P. E., Krueger, F., & Parasuraman, R. (2016) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/xap0000092 · Cited by 614
Measuring trust in organisational research: Review and recommendations
McEvily, B., & Tortoriello, M. (2011) · Journal of Trust Research · doi:10.1080/21515581.2011.552424 · Cited by 477
Repairing and Enhancing Trust: Approaches to Reducing Organizational Trust Deficits
Kramer, R. M., & Lewicki, R. J. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520.2010.487403 · Cited by 398
Lewicki, R. J., & Brinsfield, C. (2017) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113147 · Cited by 202
Trust violation and repair: The information privacy perspective
Bansal, G., & Zahedi, F. M. (2015) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2015.01.009 · Cited by 141
Timing Is Key for Robot Trust Repair
Robinette, P., Howard, A. M., & Wagner, A. R. (2015) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_57 · Cited by 121
How Can It Be Made Right Again? A Review of Trust Repair Research
Sharma, K., Schoorman, F. D., & Ballinger, G. A. (2023) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/01492063221089897 · Cited by 117
“I Don't Believe You”: Investigating the Effects of Robot Trust Violation and Repair
Sebo, S. S., Krishnamurthi, P., & Scassellati, B. (2019) · 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1109/hri.2019.8673169 · Cited by 110
Kim, T., & Song, H. (2021) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2021.101595 · Cited by 101
Coombs, W. T., & Tachkova, E. R. (2023) · Management Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/08933189221151177 · Cited by 102
Esterwood, C., & Jr, L. P. R. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2023.107658 · Cited by 98
Trust repair in human-agent teams: the effectiveness of explanations and expressing regret
Kox, E. S., Kerstholt, J. H., Hueting, T. F., & de Vries, P. W. (2021) · Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems · doi:10.1007/s10458-021-09515-9 · Cited by 83
Trust Repair Strategies with Self-Driving Vehicles: An Exploratory Study
Kohn, S. C., Quinn, D., Pak, R., de Visser, E. J., & Shaw, T. H. (2018) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1541931218621254 · Cited by 64
“Sorry, it was my fault”: Repairing trust in human-robot interactions
Zhang, X., Lee, S. K., Kim, W., & Hahn, S. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2023.103031 · Cited by 62
Owning Mistakes Sincerely: Strategies for Mitigating AI Errors
Mahmood, A., Fung, J. W., Won, I., & Huang, C.-M. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517565 · Cited by 52
Desmet, P. T. M., De Cremer, D., & van Dijk, E. (2011) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.027 · Cited by 50
Hudders, L., Lou, C., & de Brabandere, M. (2022) · International Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/02650487.2021.1963554 · Cited by 47
Having the Right Attitude: How Attitude Impacts Trust Repair in Human—Robot Interaction
Esterwood, C., & Robert, L. P. (2022) · 2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1109/hri53351.2022.9889535 · Cited by 36
How to regain green consumer trust after greenwashing: experimental evidence from China
Wang, D., & Walker, T. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su151914436 · Cited by 33
Investigating the Effects of (Empty) Promises on Human-Automation Interaction and Trust Repair
Albayram, Y., Jensen, T., Khan, M. M. H., Fahim, M. A. A., Buck, R., & Coman, E. (2020) · Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction · doi:10.1145/3406499.3415064 · Cited by 31
Repairing Integrity-Based Trust Violations in Ascription Disputes for Potential E-Commerce Customers
Deng, H., Wang, W., & Lim, K. H. (2022) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2022/15679 · Cited by 13
The unkindest cut of all: A quantitative study of betrayal narratives
Lalot, F. (2023) · Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/casp.2738 · Cited by 8
Selecting trust repair strategies: The case of privacy breaches in smart service systems
Konopka, B., Hönemann, K., Yang, N., Thatcher, J. B., & Wiesche, M. (2026) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-026-00887-y · Cited by 3
Niu, R., Eng, N., & Jin, Y. (2026) · Journal of Public Relations Research · doi:10.1080/1062726x.2026.2667179 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, P. H., Dirks, K. T., Cooper, C. D., & Ferrin, D. L.
- Venue
- Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-01
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-65
- ISSN
- 0749-5978 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1977049125
- Cited by
- 557
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 7.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
