The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Psychological Foundations of Trust
Abstract
Trust lies at the foundation of nearly all major theories of interpersonal relationships. Despite its great theoretical importance, a limited amount of research has examined how and why trust develops, is maintained, and occasionally unravels in relationships. Following a brief overview of theoretical and empirical milestones in the interpersonal-trust literature, an integrative process model of trust in dyadic relationships is presented.
Overview
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
Attachment and Loss. Vol. 1. Attachment
Rever, G. W. (1972) · Psychosomatic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00006842-197211000-00011 · Cited by 8,446 · cited 2×
“Several major theories, including attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969) and Erikson’s (1963) theory of psychosocial development, are built on the premise that higher levels of trust in relationships early in life lay the psychological foundation for happier and betterfunctioning relationships in…”
BackgroundRempel, J. K., Holmes, J. G., & Zanna, M. P. (1985) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.95 · Cited by 3,146 · cited 4×
“Beginning in the early 1980s, conceptualizations and measures of trust started to focus on specific partners and relationships (Holmes & Rempel, 1989; Rempel et al., 1985).”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
Trust, conflict, and cooperation: A meta-analysis.
Balliet, D., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0030939 · Cited by 659
Do you believe in atheists? Distrust is central to anti-atheist prejudice.
Gervais, W. M., Shariff, A. F., & Norenzayan, A. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0025882 · Cited by 495
Relationships at Work: Toward a Multidimensional Conceptualization of Dyadic Work Relationships
Ferris, G. R., Liden, R. C., Munyon, T. P., Summers, J. K., Basik, K. J., & Buckley, M. R. (2009) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206309344741 · Cited by 411
Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement
A. Agarwal, U. (2014) · Personnel Review · doi:10.1108/pr-02-2012-0019 · Cited by 389
Trusting Automation: Designing for Responsivity and Resilience
Chiou, E. K., & Lee, J. D. (2023) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/00187208211009995 · Cited by 301
Metadata
- Authors
- Simpson, J. A.
- Venue
- Current Directions in Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-10
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 264-268
- ISSN
- 0963-7214 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8721
- OpenAlex
- W2155512682
- Cited by
- 536
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Psychological Foundations of Trust. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00517.x
- The paper
- Simpson, J. A. (2007). Psychological Foundations of Trust. Current Directions in Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00517.x
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.
