CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorSocial Power and Status DynamicsSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Trust motivation: The self-regulatory processes underlying trust decisions

Open access
van der Werff, Lisa, Legood, Alison, Buckley, Finian, Weibel, Antoinette, de Cremer, David·2019·Organizational Psychology Review
DOI 10.1177/2041386619873616
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Theorizing about trust has focused predominantly on cognitive trust cues such as trustworthiness, portraying the trustor as a relatively passive observer reacting to the attributes of the other party. Using self-determination and control theories of motivation, we propose a model of trust motivation that explores the intraindividual processes involved in the volitional aspects of trust decision-making implied by the definition of trust as a willingness to be vulnerable. We distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic drivers of trust and propose a two-phase model of trust goal setting and trust regulation. Our model offers a dynamic view of the trusting process and a framework for understanding how trust cognition, affect and behavior interact over time. Furthermore, we discuss how trust goals may be altered or abandoned via a feedback loop during the trust regulation process. We conclude with a discussion of potential implications for existing theory and future research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2041386619873616

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Trust is a psychological state that represents a volitional choice to be vulnerable to another party.

    “In contrast, trust is a psychological state that represents a volitional choice to be vulnerable to another party (van der Werff et al., 2019).”

    From A meta-analysis of the role of trust in the leadership- performance relationship (2021) · cites this paper as van der Werff et al., 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van der Werff, L., Legood, A., Buckley, F., Weibel, A., & de Cremer, D.
Affiliations
  • Dublin City University, Ireland
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • Dublin City University (IE)
  • University of St.Gallen (CH)
  • National University of Singapore, Singapore
ORCID
Venue
Organizational Psychology Review
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2019-05
Volume
9
Issue
2-3
Pages
99-123
ISSN
  • 2041-3866 (ISSN-L)
  • 2041-3874
DOI
10.1177/2041386619873616
OpenAlex
W2972498521
Cited by
87
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6
FWCI
8.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Organizational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (acceptedVersion)
  • Dublin City University Open Access Institutional Repository (Dublin City University) (submittedVersion)
  • Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
trust decision-making, self-regulation, self-determination theory, control theory, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, trust regulation, vulnerability, trustworthiness

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