Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Development and Validation of an Interpersonal Distrust Scale

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

Abstract

Though many researchers have studied interpersonal trust, its counterpart, distrust, has been largely ignored. The relative dearth of distrust research may be a result of an early assumption that distrust represents an absence of trust. Nevertheless, recent reviews have pointed out that distrust is not the opposite of trust, but rather a distinct construct (e.g., Lewicki, Tomlinson, & Gillespie, Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438–458, 2006; Lumineau, Journal of Management, 0149206314556656, 2015). We use three studies to empirically demonstrate that distrust and trust are descriptively bipolar but functionally distinct constructs. In Study 1, we generate a distrust scale with methodological rigor, which shows good psychometric properties. In Study 2, we crossvalidate the distrust scale. Discriminant validity of the new scale also demonstrates that the distrust scale is distinct from subscales of trust and another theoretically relevant construct (i.e., distrust propensity), which provides the first empirical evidence that distrust is not redundant with trust. Moreover, we develop a theoretical model of distrust antecedents and outcomes based on social exchange theory and empirically investigate the nomological network of interpersonal distrust in Study 3. Consistent with the hypotheses, interpersonal distrust significantly correlates with the theoretical antecedents and consequences across two samples. Additionally, our findings in Study 3 demonstrate that distrust has significantly different relation strength with other constructs compared to trust, which further supports that distrust and trust are descriptive bipolar but functionally independent constructs.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We also conducted a measurement invariance test of the interpersonal distrust scale and reported the results in supplemental material 3.

  2. Please note for the healthcare participants, risk-taking and incapacity were not measured because it was unlikely that healthcare workers could engage in risk-taking behavior toward distrust others, given their work nature, and it was also difficult for them to evaluate the incapacity if their distrusted others were clients.

  3. Supplemental material 4 also includes a table summarizing the hypotheses, samples, and findings examined in “Study 3: Nomological Network and Criterion-Related Validity” (Table 3), a table summarizing samples used in the current study (table 4), and all the scales and instructions used in the current study.

References

  • Adams, J. E., Highhouse, S., & Zickar, M. J. (2010). Understanding general distrust of corporations. Corporate Reputation Review, 13(1), 38–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, M. D., Matta, F. K., Kim, J. K., Welsh, D. T., & Garud, N. (2018). It’s not you, it’s them: Social influences on trust propensity and trust dynamics. Personnel Psychology, 71(3), 423–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B. (1983). The Logic and Limits of Trust. Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benamati, J., Serva, M. A., & Fuller, M. A. (2006). Are trust and distrust distinct constructs? An empirical study of the effects of trust and distrust among online banking users. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Science. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

  • Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349–364.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo, J. T., & Berntson, G. G. (1994). Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin, 115(3), 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, L., Thissen, D., & du Toit, S. H. C. (2011). IRTPRO: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling [Computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casper, W. J., Vaziri, H., Wayne, J. H., DeHauw, S., & Greenhaus, J. (2018). The jingle-jangle of work–nonwork balance: A comprehensive and meta-analytic review of its meaning and measurement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(2), 182–214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, J. (2006). The mechanism of trust and distrust formation and their relational outcomes. Journal of Retailing, 82(1), 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(4), 668–678.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Creed, D., & Miles, R. (1996). A conceptual framework linking organizational forms, managerial philosophies, and the opportunity costs of controls. In R. Kramer & T. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 16–38). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., Anthony, E. L., Daniels, S. R., & Hall, A. V. (2017). Social exchange theory: A critical review with theoretical remedies. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 479–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahling, J. J., Whitaker, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale. Journal of Management, 35(2), 219–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, B. A., & Dirks, K. T. (2012). Beyond shared perceptions of trust and monitoring in teams: Implications of asymmetry and dissensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 391–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, S. B., Van der Vegt, G. S., & Molleman, E. (2007). The relationships among asymmetry in task dependence, perceived helping behavior, and trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1625–1637.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimoka, A. (2010). What does the brain tell us about trust and distrust? Evidence from a functional neuroimaging study. MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 373–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 331–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Akremi, A., Vandenberghe, C., & Camerman, J. (2010). The role of justice and social exchange relationships in workplace deviance: Test of a mediated model. Human Relations, 63(11), 1687–1717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foa, U. G., & Foa, E. B. (1974). Societal structures of the mind. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 382–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 7). Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershcovis, M. S. (2011). “Incivility, social undermining, bullying… oh my!”: A call to reconcile constructs within workplace aggression research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(3), 499–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoerger, M. (2013). ZH: An updated version of Steiger’s Z and web-based calculator for testing the statistical significance of the difference between dependent correlations. Retrieved from: http://www.psychmike.com/dependent_correlations.php

  • IBM Corp. Released 2016. IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

  • Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, K. J. (1972). On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement: A suggested modification of the semantic differential technique. Psychological Bulletin, 77(5), 361–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein, M. (2008). Developing a measure of unethical behavior in the workplace: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management, 34(5), 978–1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kee, H. W., & Knox, R. E. (1970). Conceptual and methodological considerations in the study of trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 14(3), 357–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, M. A., Brower, H. H., & Lester, S. W. (2015). It isn’t always mutual: A critical review of dyadic trust. Journal of Management, 41(1), 47–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M. (1994). The sinister attribution error: Paranoid cognition and collective distrust in organizations. Motivation and Emotion, 18(2), 199–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le, H., Schmidt, F. L., Harter, J. K., & Lauver, K. J. (2010). The problem of empirical redundancy of constructs in organizational research: An empirical investigation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112(2), 112–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K., & Allen, N. J. (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 131–142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. N., & Huynh, M. (2005). An integrative model of trust on IT outsourcing: From the service receiver’s perspective. PACIS 2005 Proceedings, 767–779.

  • Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C., & Gillespie, N. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust development: Theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions. Journal of Management, 32(6), 991–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social Forces, 63(4), 967–985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopes, L. L. (1987). Between hope and fear: The psychology of risk. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 255–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumineau, F. (2015). How contracts influence trust and distrust. Journal of Management, 0149206314556656.

  • Lyons, B. J., & Scott, B. A. (2012). Integrating social exchange and affective explanations for the receipt of help and harm: A social network approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 66–79.

    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(1), 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(3), 709–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCaskill, J. W., & Lakey, B. (2000). Perceived support, social undermining, and emotion: Idiosyncratic and shared perspectives of adolescents and their families. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(7), 820–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, D.H., & Chervany, N. (2001). While trust is cool and collected, distrust is fiery and frenzied: A model of distrust concepts. Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston, MA.

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

  • McNeely, B. L., & Meglino, B. M. (1994). The role of dispositional and situational antecedents in prosocial organizational behavior: An examination of the intended beneficiaries of prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(6), 836–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priester, J. R., & Petty, R. E. (1996). The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: Relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 431–449.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, A., Peters, N., Shea, J. A., & Armstrong, K. (2004). Development and testing of the health care system distrust scale. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 19(1), 57–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived organizational support, leader–member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 219–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, J. A., DeGeest, D., & Li, A. (2016). Tackling the problem of construct proliferation: A guide to assessing the discriminant validity of conceptually related constructs. Organizational Research Methods, 19(1), 80–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, F. L., Le, H., & Ilies, R. (2003). Beyond alpha: An empirical examination of the effects of different sources of measurement error on reliability estimates for measures of individual-differences constructs. Psychological Methods, 8(2), 206–224.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sitkin, S. B., & Roth, N. L. (1993). Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organization Science, 4(3), 367–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13, 675–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. A. O. D. W. N. J. P., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., & Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 446–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. S., & Bolino, M. C. (2018). Negative beliefs about accepting coworker help: Implications for employee attitudes, job performance, and reputation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(8), 842–866.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219–235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 82–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, E. U., & Johnson, E. J. (2009). Decisions under uncertainty: Psychological, economic, and neuroeconomic explanations of risk preference. In Neuroeconomics (pp. 127–144). Academic Press.

  • Zevon, M. A., & Tellegen, A. (1982). The structure of mood change: An idiographic/nomothetic analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(1), 111–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Part of this study (i.e., sample 3 data collection) was funded by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Education and Research Center Pilot Research Project Grant (#T42OH008432).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, 16801, USA

    Hanyi Min

  2. Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, USA

    Michael J. Zickar

Authors
  1. Hanyi Min
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael J. Zickar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hanyi Min.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 124 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Min, H., Zickar, M.J. The Development and Validation of an Interpersonal Distrust Scale. J Bus Psychol 38, 1099–1120 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09854-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09854-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation