The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Contextual Confidence and Active Trust Development in the Chinese Business Environment
Abstract
This paper contributes to the conceptual and empirical understanding of organizational trust. It confirms the importance of “contextual confidence” in institutions for building trust. Moreover, it extends models of trust production to include the effects of purposive action by the truster over and above the contextual prediction of trust emphasized in previous research. Accordingly, “active trust development” is conceptualized as a strategy to strengthen the basis for trust. Empirical evidence is drawn from a survey of 615 Hong Kong firms that manage operations in mainland China. Confidence in China's institutional context was found to have a strong positive association with trust in the local staff working within that context. Active trust development was validated as a means of enhancing trust, though its effect on trust was not as strong as that of perceived institutional effectiveness. Active trust development initiatives are particularly valuable in an environment such as contemporary China, where the institutional foundations for trust remain underdeveloped. The positive correlation of trust with organizational performance provides an incentive for managers to explore these initiatives. At the same time, government and other bodies in China and elsewhere, which are in a position to create and promote effective institutions, are encouraged to intensify their efforts in that direction.
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
Back-translation for cross-cultural research.
Brislin, R. W. (1970) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/135910457000100301 · Cited by 14,091
An integrative model of organizational trust
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258792 · Cited by 10,736
Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346
Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2578601 · Cited by 4,163
Deutsch, M. (1958) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/002200275800200401 · Cited by 2,077
Cited by
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.909 · Cited by 2,606
Cao, Z., & Lumineau, F. (2015) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2014.09.009 · Cited by 937
At What Level (and in Whom) We Trust: Trust Across Multiple Organizational Levels
Fulmer, C. A., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206312439327 · Cited by 886
Understanding Institutional-based Trust Building Processes in Inter-organizational Relationships
Bachmann, R., & Inkpen, A. C. (2011) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840610397477 · Cited by 508
Zhou, K. Z., & Poppo, L. (2010) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.7 · Cited by 494
Metadata
- Authors
- Child, J., & Möllering, G.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2003-02
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-80
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2120056947
- Cited by
- 365
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 41.64
- 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: Contextual Confidence and Active Trust Development in the Chinese Business Environment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.14.1.69.12813
- The paper
- Child, J., & Möllering, G. (2003). Contextual Confidence and Active Trust Development in the Chinese Business Environment. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.1.69.12813
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.