Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

I Do Not Want to Trust You, but I Do: on the Relationship Between Trust Intent, Trusting Behavior, and Time Pressure

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 07 December 2018

This article has been updated

Abstract

We investigate the interplay of trust intent and trust behavior, an underresearched yet critical link in the trust process. Using the theory of planned behavior as a framework, we investigate the influence of time pressure (with and without personal urgency) on the intent-behavior link via two Web-based experiments. In study 1, we test how time pressure that entails a sense of personal urgency influences the intent–behavior link. On the other hand, in study 2, we investigate time pressure without a sense of personal urgency. We show that, while lacking intent to trust reduces trusting behavior, it does not become zero (study 1), and find that repeated decisions pan out differently for trustors who originally did not intend to act trustingly versus those who did (study 2). We offer new insights on the link between trust intentions and behavior by showing that while low trust intentions indeed reduce trusting behavior, trusting behavior still occurs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 07 December 2018

    In the original version of the article, unfortunately, some values were shifted by one column in the correlation table under Study 2 and were misaligned with the corresponding variable pairs.

References

  • Abrams, L. C., Cross, R., Lesser, E., & Levin, D. Z. (2003). Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks. Academy of Management Executive, 17(4), 64–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H. & Gottfredson, R. K. (2010). Best-practice recommendations for estimating interaction effects using moderated multiple regression. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 776–786.

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84(5), 888–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173–221). New York: Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1985). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, M. D., Dhensa-Kahlon, R. K., Colquitt, J. A., Rodell, J. B., Outlaw, R., & Long, D. M. (2015). Uneasy lies the head that bears the trust: The effects of feeling trusted on emotional exhaustion. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1637–1657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrera, D., & Buskens, V. (2007). Imitation and learning under uncertainty: A vignette experiment. International Sociology, 22(3), 367–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben Zur, H., & Brenitz, S. J. (1981). The effect of time pressure on risky choice behavior. Acta Psychologica, 47, 89–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 122–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, A. W., Dai, H., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2014). I’m sorry about the rain! Superfluous apologies demonstrate empathic concern and increase trust. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(4), 467–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s mechanical turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Busemeyer, J. R. (1985). Decision making under uncetainty: A comparison of simple scalability, fixed-sample, and sequential-sampling models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 538–564.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., Piccolo, R. F., Zapata, C. P., & Rich, B. L. (2011). Explaining the justice-performance relationship: Trust as exchange deepener or trust as uncertainty reducer? Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 1–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analysis test of their unique relationship with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 909–927.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R. K. (2016). Banks’ true currency: Trust, The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/banks-true-currency-trust-1464884630

  • De Cremer, D. (2010). Rebuilding trust. Business Strategy Review, 21(2), 79–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D. (2015). Why our trust in banks hasn’t been restored. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/03/why-our-trust-in-banks-hasnt-been-restored

  • Dietz, G. (2011). Going back to the source: Why do people trust each other? Journal of Trust Research, 1(2), 215–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2011.603514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, G., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2006). Measuring trust inside organizations. Personnel Review, 35(5), 557–588. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480610682299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12, 450–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman (2018). 2018 Edelman trust barometer global report.

  • Gillespie, N. (2012). Measuring trust in organizational contexts: An overview of survey-based measures. In F. Lyon, G. Möllering, & M. N. K. Saunders (Eds.), Handbook of research methods on trust. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2004). The role of social capital in financial development. American Economic Review, 94(3), 526–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haselhuhn, M. P., Kennedy, J. A., Kray, L. J., Van Zant, A. B., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2015). Gender differences in trust dynamics: Women trust more than men following a trust violation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 56, 104–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, M.-H., & Chang, C.-M. (2014). Examining interpersonal trust as a facilitator and uncertainty as an inhibitor of intra-organisational knowledge sharing. Information Systems Journal, 24(2), 119–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kocher, M. G., Pahlke, J., & Trautmann, S. T. (2013). Tempus fugit: Time pressure in risky decisions. Management Science, 59(10), 2380–2391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor-hindrance stressor framework: A explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 764–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, E. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2015). Prosocial lies: When deception breeds trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 126, 88–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23, 438–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1995). Trust in relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 5(1), 583–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In R. M. Kramer & T. M. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 114–139). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Li, P. P. (2008). Toward a geocentric framework of trust: An application to organizational trust. Management and Organization Review, 4(3), 413–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 123–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, S. (1990). The effects of time pressure and audit program structure on audit performance. Journal of Accounting Research, 28, 267–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, B., Perrone, V., & Zaheer, A. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science, 14, 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, D. H., & Choudhury, V. (2006). Distrust and trust in B2C e-commerce: Do they differ? Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Electronic Commerce, Fredericton, Canada.

  • McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23, 473–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson, D., Weick, K., & Kramer, R. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. In M. K. T. R. Tyler (Ed.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 166–195). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, S., Tansley, C., & Huang, J. (2004). Social capital and knowledge integration in an ERP project team: The importance of bridging and bonding. British Journal of Management, 15, 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ordóñez, L., & Benson, L. (1997). Decision under time pressure: How time constraints affects risky decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71(2), 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechical Turk. Judgment and Decision making, 5(5), 411–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2012). A trust crisis. International Review of Finance, 12(2), 123–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32, 344–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serva, M. A., Fuller, M. A., & Mayer, R. C. (2005). The reciprocal nature of trust: A longitudinal study of interacting teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 625–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, D., Rust, R. T., Parasuraman, A., Staelin, R., & Day, G. S. (2006). The path to customer centricity. Journal of Service Research, 9(2), 113–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Six, F., Nooteboom, B., & Hoogendoorn, A. (2010). Actions that build interpersonal trust: A relational signaling perspective. Review of Social Economy, LXVII(3), 285–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui-Auch, L. S., & Möllering, G. (2010). Wary managers: Unfavorable environments, perceived vulnerability, and the development of trust in foreign enterprises in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(6), 1016–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, M. J., Giambatista, R. C., & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E. (1999). The effects of individual time urgency on group polychronicity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14(3/4), 244–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, E. U., Blais, A.-R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 263–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, D. L., Goodie, A. S., Hall, D. B., & Wu, E. (2012). Decision making under time pressure, modeled in a prospect theory framework. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118, 179–188.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, 9, 141–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer, S., & Zaheer, A. (2006). Trust across borders. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Leadership and Organization, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539, Munich, Germany

    Brooke Ann Gazdag, Marie Haude & Martin Hoegl

  2. Organizational Behavior, WHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management, Vallendar, Germany

    Miriam Muethel

Authors
  1. Brooke Ann Gazdag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marie Haude
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin Hoegl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Miriam Muethel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brooke Ann Gazdag.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Brooke Ann Gazdag and Marie Haude shared first authorship

The original version of this article was revised: In the original version of the article, unfortunately, some values were shifted by one column in the correlation table under Study 2 and were misaligned with the corresponding variable pairs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gazdag, B.A., Haude, M., Hoegl, M. et al. I Do Not Want to Trust You, but I Do: on the Relationship Between Trust Intent, Trusting Behavior, and Time Pressure. J Bus Psychol 34, 731–743 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9597-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9597-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation