CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 117Forgiveness and Related BehaviorsCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior

How Can It Be Made Right Again? A Review of Trust Repair Research

Sharma, Kinshuk, Schoorman, F. David, Ballinger, Gary A.·2023·Journal of Management
DOI 10.1177/01492063221089897
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We review research on the topic of trust repair, which has proceeded over the past four decades using three different philosophical mechanisms that provide the bases through which trust is restored by multiple repair tactics. We base our definition of trust repair on the view that trust is “a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based on the positive expectations of the intentions or behaviors of another.” We define trust repair as any increase in trust above the post-transgression level and complete repair as an increase in trust to the pre-transgression level. We provide an overview of the research designs incorporated in the trust-repair literature and make recommendations and cautions in measuring trust repair. We then summarize the emergence of the different mechanisms behind trust repair, namely, attributional, social equilibrium, and structural mechanisms, and review literature on the related verbal and behavioral repair tactics that can be employed after a transgression. We also provide a review on the process of trust repair, that is, the different stages that unfold to repair trust. We conclude by suggesting that future research should explore trust repair not only from an isolated tactics perspective but also from a broader pathway perspective. Finally, as trust repair occurs over time, future research should also explore the role of differing perceptions of time in the trust-repair process.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/01492063221089897

Cites

178 of 178 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?

  • The impact of human-like repair strategies on a user's decision to continue using the system may be limited, especially when enacted by a non-human agent.

    “Their impact on a user's decision to continue using the system may be limited, especially when enacted by a non-human agent (Lewicki & Brinsfield, 2017;Sharma et al., 2023).”

    From Explainability in AI: Comparing Human-Like and System-Like Trust Repair Strategies (2026) · cites this paper as Sharma et al., 2023

  • Trust repair strategy effectiveness is context-dependent.

    “Prior research indicates that trust repair strategy effectiveness is context-dependent”

    From Explainability in AI: Comparing Human-Like and System-Like Trust Repair Strategies (2026) · cites this paper as Sharma et al., 2023

  • Strategy combinations have so far received little attention in trust repair research.

    “Despite the intuitive appeal and growing organizational adoption of such hybrid approaches, strategy combinations have so far received little attention in trust repair research”

    From Explainability in AI: Comparing Human-Like and System-Like Trust Repair Strategies (2026) · cites this paper as Sharma et al., 2023

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sharma, K., Schoorman, F. D., & Ballinger, G. A.
Affiliations
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • University of Virginia (US)
Corresponding author
Sharma, Kinshuk
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Management
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2022-04-27
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
363-399
ISSN
  • 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1211
DOI
10.1177/01492063221089897
OpenAlex
W4293187084
Cited by
117
References
177
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 1
FWCI
18.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Keywords
trust repair, transgression, structural mechanisms, trust measurement, time perception, interpersonal trust

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