A Research Agenda for Trust in Online Environments
Abstract
We present an agenda for the future research that has the potential to extend the conceptual foundations of trust in online environments and to improve the practice in the domain. The agenda draws on the previous work on trust, the papers included in this Special Issue, and our perspective on the state of the literature. This agenda is structured into four components-nature and role of trust, moderators of trust, antecedents of trust, and empirical methods for examining trust.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The product itself may be subject to trust concerns in the sharing economy.
“Moreover, even the product (and related experience) itself (think for example of a privately rented apartment or car) may be subject to trust concerns ( Gefen et al. 2008)”
From Trust in the Sharing Economy (2016) · cites this paper as Gefen et al. 2008
The three dimensions ability, integrity, and benevolence are well established for measuring trust in online environments.
“These three dimensions were already covered in the work of Gefen/Straub (2004) and are well established for measuring trust in online environments ( Gefen et al. 2008).”
From Trust in the Sharing Economy (2016) · cites this paper as Gefen et al. 2008
The impact of trust on online repurchase is not independent from its context.
“However, the impact of trust on online repurchase is not independent from its context, which has recently led researchers to call for further exploration of an additional area of concern: the moderating effect of the e-commerce institutional context on the relationship between trust and online repurchase (Gefen et al. 2008)”
From Trust, Satisfaction, and Online Repurchase Intention: The Moderating Role of Perceived Effectiveness of E-Commerce Institutional Mechanisms1 (2014) · cites this paper as Gefen et al. 2008
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 54 · Cited by 482
- Authors
- Gefen, D., Benbasat, I., & Pavlou, P.
- Affiliations
- Drexel University (US)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- University of California, Riverside (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Management Information Systems
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-04
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 275-286
- ISSN
- 0742-1222 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-928X
- OpenAlex
- W2061650887
- Cited by
- 482
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 26
- FWCI
- 40.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Management Information Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
- Keywords
- trust, internet environment, antecedents of trust, research agenda
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
