Ambiguity and expectation-neglect in dilemmas of interpersonal trust

A.M. Evans, Joachim Krueger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Recent research suggests that people discount or neglect expectations of reciprocity in trust dilemmas. We examine the underlying processes and boundary conditions of this effect, finding that expectations have stronger effects on trust when they are made accessible and when they are provided as objective probabilities (Study 1). Objective expectations have stronger effects when they are based on precise, rather than ambiguous, probabilities (Study 2). We also find that trust decisions differ from individual risk-taking decisions: people are more willing to trust, and expectations have stronger effects on trusting behavior (Study 2). These results show that the availability and ambiguity of expectations shape trust decisions, and that people differentially weight expectations in dilemmas of trust and individual risk-taking.
Keywords: trust, risk, expectations, bounded rationality
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)584-595
JournalJudgment and Decision Making
Volume12
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Interpersonal trust
Neglect
Weights and Measures
Individual risk
Risk taking
Key words
Discount
Boundary conditions
Bounded rationality

Cite this

@article{624fdd6adf564cf299e2e6818703ed69,
title = "Ambiguity and expectation-neglect in dilemmas of interpersonal trust",
abstract = "Recent research suggests that people discount or neglect expectations of reciprocity in trust dilemmas. We examine the underlying processes and boundary conditions of this effect, finding that expectations have stronger effects on trust when they are made accessible and when they are provided as objective probabilities (Study 1). Objective expectations have stronger effects when they are based on precise, rather than ambiguous, probabilities (Study 2). We also find that trust decisions differ from individual risk-taking decisions: people are more willing to trust, and expectations have stronger effects on trusting behavior (Study 2). These results show that the availability and ambiguity of expectations shape trust decisions, and that people differentially weight expectations in dilemmas of trust and individual risk-taking. Keywords: trust, risk, expectations, bounded rationality",
author = "A.M. Evans and Joachim Krueger",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "584--595",
journal = "Judgment and Decision Making",
issn = "1930-2975",
publisher = "Society for Judgment and Decision Making",
number = "6",

}

Ambiguity and expectation-neglect in dilemmas of interpersonal trust. / Evans, A.M.; Krueger, Joachim.

In: Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 12, No. 6, 2017, p. 584-595.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ambiguity and expectation-neglect in dilemmas of interpersonal trust

AU - Evans, A.M.

AU - Krueger, Joachim

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Recent research suggests that people discount or neglect expectations of reciprocity in trust dilemmas. We examine the underlying processes and boundary conditions of this effect, finding that expectations have stronger effects on trust when they are made accessible and when they are provided as objective probabilities (Study 1). Objective expectations have stronger effects when they are based on precise, rather than ambiguous, probabilities (Study 2). We also find that trust decisions differ from individual risk-taking decisions: people are more willing to trust, and expectations have stronger effects on trusting behavior (Study 2). These results show that the availability and ambiguity of expectations shape trust decisions, and that people differentially weight expectations in dilemmas of trust and individual risk-taking. Keywords: trust, risk, expectations, bounded rationality

AB - Recent research suggests that people discount or neglect expectations of reciprocity in trust dilemmas. We examine the underlying processes and boundary conditions of this effect, finding that expectations have stronger effects on trust when they are made accessible and when they are provided as objective probabilities (Study 1). Objective expectations have stronger effects when they are based on precise, rather than ambiguous, probabilities (Study 2). We also find that trust decisions differ from individual risk-taking decisions: people are more willing to trust, and expectations have stronger effects on trusting behavior (Study 2). These results show that the availability and ambiguity of expectations shape trust decisions, and that people differentially weight expectations in dilemmas of trust and individual risk-taking. Keywords: trust, risk, expectations, bounded rationality

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 584

EP - 595

JO - Judgment and Decision Making

JF - Judgment and Decision Making

SN - 1930-2975

IS - 6

ER -