The Meaning(s) of Trust. A Content Analysis on the Diverse Conceptualizations of Trust in Scholarly Research on Business Relationships
- 2k Downloads
Scholarly research largely converges on the argument that trust is of paramount importance to drive economic agents toward mutually satisfactory, fair, and ethically compliant behaviors. There is, however, little agreement on the meaning of trust, whose conceptualizations differ with respect to actors, relationships, behaviors, and contexts. At present, we know much better what trust does than what trust is. In this article, we present an extensive review and analysis of the most prominent articles on trust in market relationships. Using computer-aided content analysis and network analysis methods, we identify key, recurring dimensions that guided the conceptualization of trust in past research, and show how trust can be developed as a multifaceted and layered construct. Our results are an important contribution to a convergence of research toward a shared and common view of the meaning of trust. This process is important to ensure the body of trust research’s internal theoretical consistency, and to provide reliable and common principles for the management of business relationships – a context in which opportunism and imperfect information may induce economic actors to cheat and stray from fair and ethically compliant behaviors.
Keywordstrust trust conceptualization business relationships content analysis network analysis review
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
The authors are grateful to the Editor and the two anonymous referees for their insightful comments on prior versions of this article. The authors would like also to thank Consuelo Gastaldo for her support in the earlier steps of the research process.
Only the references cited in the text are provided. The complete list of the references used for this study is available on request (from the authors).
- Andaleeb, S. S.: 1992, ‘The Trust Concept: Research Issues for Channels of Distribution’, Research in Marketing, 11, 1-34.Google Scholar
- Barber, B.: 1983, The Logic and Limits of Trust, (Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ).Google Scholar
- Berg, B. L.: 1995, Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, (Allyn and Bacon, Boston), 2nd edition.Google Scholar
- Boyatzis, R. E.: 1998, Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development, (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
- Gambetta, D.: 1988, ‘Can we Trust?’, in D. Gambetta (ed)., Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, (Basil Blackwell Ltd, Oxford).Google Scholar
- Garfield, E.: 1979, Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology and the Humanities, (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
- Kramer, R.M. and T.R. Tyler (eds.): 1996, Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
- Kuhn, T.S.: 1970, The structure of scientific revolutions, (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, second edition).Google Scholar
- Lane, C. and R. Bachmann (eds.): 1998, Trust Within and Between Organizations. Conceptual Issues and Empirical Analysis, (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
- Lane, P. J., Koka B. R. and S. Pathak: 2006, ‘The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct’, Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 833–863.Google Scholar
- Luhmann, N.: 1979, Trust and Power, (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
- Merton, R.K.: 1973, The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations, (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
- Pruitt, D.G.: 1981, Negotiation Behavior, (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
- Rousseau, D. M and R. J House: 1994, ‘Meso Organizational Behavior: Avoiding Three Fundamental Biases’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1: 13-30.Google Scholar
- Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin S. B., Burt R. S. and C. Camerer: 1998, ‘Not so Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View of Trust’, Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404.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 (2), pp. 344–354.Google Scholar
- Vigoda-Gadot, E.: 2007, ‘Citizens’ Perceptions of Politics and Ethics in Public Administration: A Five-Year National Study of Their Relationship to Satisfaction with Services, Trust in Governance, and Voice Orientations’, Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 17(2), 285-305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wasserman, S. and K. Faust: 1994, Social network analysis: Methods and applications, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar