The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Effects of Explanations on Negative Reactions to Deceit
Abstract
Debra L. Shapiro University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill This study examined a model of the relative mitigating effects of three types of explanations on the negative reactions of subjects who had been told that they had been deceived. Explanations were found to mitigate differentially feelings of disapproval, injustice, punitiveness, and unforgiveness, depending on the type of explanation, the severity of the outcome the subjects experienced, how adequate they judged the explanation to be, and how honest they felt the explainer was. The perceived adequacy of the explanation was more important in mitigating negative reactions than the type of explanation, although punitiveness was affected, more than the other negative reactions, by the type of explanation and was moderated more by the outcomes of greater severity. The study shows that whether explanations have a mitigating effect on negative reactions depends on more than the characteristics of the explanations and the explainer, which have been the focus of previous research.'
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
Cited by
Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425 · Cited by 5,942
Elsbach, K. D. (1994) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393494 · Cited by 1,085
Repairing and Enhancing Trust: Approaches to Reducing Organizational Trust Deficits
Kramer, R. M., & Lewicki, R. J. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520.2010.487403 · Cited by 398
Janssen, O., Lam, C. K., & Huang, X. (2010) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.614 · Cited by 230
Kidder, D. L., Lankau, M. J., Chrobot‐Mason, D., Mollica, K. A., & Friedman, R. A. (2004) · International Journal of Conflict Management · doi:10.1108/eb022908 · Cited by 209
Metadata
- Authors
- Shapiro, D. L.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1991-12
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 614
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2005756965
- Cited by
- 226
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.12
- 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: The Effects of Explanations on Negative Reactions to Deceit. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2393276
- The paper
- Shapiro, D. L. (1991). The Effects of Explanations on Negative Reactions to Deceit. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393276
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.
