Cited by 3,146Attachment and Relationship DynamicsPersonality Traits and PsychologyForgiveness and Related Behaviors

Trust in close relationships.

Rempel, John K., Holmes, John G., Zanna, Mark P.·1985·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

A theoretical model describing interpersonal trust in close relationships is presented. Three dimensions of trust are identified, based on the type of attributions drawn about a partner's motives. These dimensions are also characterized by a developmental progression in the relationship. The validity of this theoretical perspective was examined through evidence obtained from a survey of a heterogeneous sample of established couples. An analysis of the Trust Scale in this sample was consistent with the notion that the predictability, dependability, and faith components represent distinct and coherent dimensions. A scale to measure interpersonal motives was also developed. The perception of intrinsic motives in a partner emerged as a dimension, as did instrumental and extrinsic motives. As expected, love and happiness were closely tied to feelings of faith and the attribution of intrinsic motivation to both self and partner. Women appeared to have more integrated, complex views of their relationships than men: All three forms of trust were strongly related and attributions of instrumental motives in their partners seemed to be self-affirming. Finally, there was a tendency for people to view their own motives as less self-centered and more exclusively intrinsic in flavor than their partner's motives.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.95

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In fulfillment, the trustor realizes a benefit, which can be financial or can be entertainment, sociability, time saved, reduced cognitive effort, or seamless collaboration.

    “In the case of fulfillment (3a), the trustor realizes a benefit. This can be financial, but her desired outcome might also be entertainment, sociability, time saved, reduced cognitive effort, or seamless collaboration (Corritore et al., 2003; McKnight et al., 2000; Rempel, Holmes, & Zanna, 1985).”

    From The mechanics of trust: A framework for research and design (2005) · cites this paper as Rempel, Holmes, & Zanna, 1985

  • Trust, once broken, is difficult to rebuild.

    “(1) trust, once broken, is difficult to rebuild [45]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rempel, J. K., Holmes, J. G., & Zanna, M. P.
Affiliations
University of Waterloo (CA)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
1985-07
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
95-112
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2034235631
Cited by
3,146
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 77 · 2025: 110 · 2024: 108 · 2023: 127 · 2022: 121 · 2021: 153 · 2020: 135 · 2019: 132 · 2018: 141 · 2017: 125 · 2016: 137 · 2015: 135 · 2014: 120 · 2013: 124 · 2012: 133
FWCI
7.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
Keywords
interpersonal trust, close relationships, couples, intrinsic motivation, instrumental motivation, extrinsic motivation, self-affirmation, faith, predictability, dependability, gender differences, relationship building, trust scale

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