The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Behavioral Decision Theory Approach to Modeling Dyadic Trust in Superiors and Subordinates
Abstract
The relative importances of five determinants of dyadic trust (integrity, competence, consistency, loyalty, and openness) were investigated from two perspectives: trust in superiors and trust in subordinates. Two experiments were designed from research on behavioral decision theory. The participants, 78 undergraduate management students, responded to cues that described hypothetical superiors (Exp. 1) and subordinates (Exp. 2). Responses indicated the amount of trust held in each of 32 superiors and 32 subordinates. Integrity, competence, and consistency were stronger than loyalty or openness as determinants of trust in one's superiors and in one's subordinates. There were no differences in the importance of any of the determinants of trust in one's subordinates versus one's superiors. Method considerations are discussed.
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
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
Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance
Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392 · Cited by 6,605
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
TRUST: THE CONNECTING LINK BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY AND PHILOSOPHICAL ETHICS
Hosmer, L. T. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9507312923 · Cited by 2,323
Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust
Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P., & Mullen, M. R. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259297 · Cited by 1,844
Metadata
- Authors
- Butler, J. K., & Cantrell, R. S.
- Venue
- Psychological Reports
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1984-08
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 19-28
- ISSN
- 0033-2941 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-691X
- OpenAlex
- W2016549961
- Cited by
- 597
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.39
- 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: A Behavioral Decision Theory Approach to Modeling Dyadic Trust in Superiors and Subordinates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2466/pr0.1984.55.1.19
- The paper
- Butler, J. K., & Cantrell, R. S. (1984). A Behavioral Decision Theory Approach to Modeling Dyadic Trust in Superiors and Subordinates. Psychological Reports. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1984.55.1.19
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.
