Cited by 1,248Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesConflict Management and NegotiationCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty

Influences on exchange processes: Buyers’ preconceptions of a seller’s trustworthiness and bargaining toughness

Schurr, Paul H., Ozanne, Julie L.·1985·Journal of Consumer Research

Abstract

Exchange theories posit that trust has an important and favorable influence on dyadic interactions. This paper examines the notion that trust plays a key role in making a seller's tough bargaining strategy successful. In a bargaining experiment, we manipulated subjects' preconceptions about a seller's trustworthiness and bargaining toughness. As hypothesized, a seller's expected trustworthiness-plus-toughness in bargaining led to higher levels of buyer-seller cooperation and agreement and a higher level of buyer concessions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/209028

Cites

37 of 37 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schurr, P. H., & Ozanne, J. L.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
Journal of Consumer Research
Published
1985-03
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
939
ISSN
  • 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5277
OpenAlex
W2020976086
Cited by
1,248
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 65 · 2014: 72 · 2013: 65 · 2012: 65
FWCI
21.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consumer Research (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of Consumer Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Conflict Management and Negotiation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
Keywords
trust, bargaining, trustworthiness, preconceptions, dyadic interaction

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