Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 354

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 206 of the 206 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Are There Neural Gender Differences in Online Trust? An fMRI Study on the Perceived Trustworthiness of eBay Offers1

Riedl, René, Hubert, Marco, Kenning, Peter·2010·MIS Quarterly

Abstract

Research provides increasing evidence that women and men differ in their decisions to trust. However, information systems research does not satisfactorily explain why these gender differences exist. One possible reason is that, surprisingly, theoretical concepts often do not address the most obvious factor that influences human behavior: biology. Given the essential role of biological factors—and specifically those of the brain—in decisions to trust, the biological influences should naturally include those related to gender. As trust considerations in economic decision making have become increasingly complex with the expansion of Internet use, understanding the related biological/brain functions and the involvement of gender provides a range of valuable insights. To show empirically that online trust is associated with activity changes in certain brain areas, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). In a laboratory experiment, we captured the brain activity of 10 female and 10 male participants simultaneous to decisions on trustworthiness of eBay offers. We found that most of the brain areas that encode trustworthiness differ between women and men. Moreover, we found that women activated more brain areas than did men. These results confirm the empathizing– systemizing theory, which predicts gender differences in neural information processing modes. In demonstrating that perceived trustworthiness of Internet offers is affected by neurobiology, our study has major implications for both IS research and management. We confirm the value of a category of research heretofore neglected in IS research and practice, and argue that future IS research investigating human behavior should consider the role of biological factors. In practice, biological factors are a significant consideration for management, marketing, and engineering attempts to influence behavior.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/20721434

Cites

206 of 206 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 206 references

Cited by

See all 354

Metadata

Authors
Riedl, R., Hubert, M., & Kenning, P.
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
2010-06-01
Volume
34
Issue
2
Pages
397-428
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
OpenAlex
W1540163242
Cited by
354
References
206
FWCI
11.77
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: Are There Neural Gender Differences in Online Trust? An fMRI Study on the Perceived Trustworthiness of eBay Offers1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/20721434
The paper
Riedl, R., Hubert, M., & Kenning, P. (2010). Are There Neural Gender Differences in Online Trust? An fMRI Study on the Perceived Trustworthiness of eBay Offers1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/20721434

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.