Scholars have assumed that trust is fragile: difficult to build and easily broken. We demonstrate, however, that in some cases trust is surprisingly robust—even when harmful deception is revealed, some individuals maintain high levels of trust in the deceiver. In this paper, we describe how implicit theories moderate the harmful effects of revealed deception on a key component of trust: perceptions of integrity. In a negotiation context, we show that people who hold incremental theories (beliefs that negotiating abilities are malleable) reduce perceptions of their counterpart’s integrity after they learn that they were deceived, whereas people who hold entity theories (beliefs that negotiators’ characteristics and abilities are fixed) maintain their first impressions after learning that they were deceived. Implicit theories influenced how targets interpreted evidence of deception. Individuals with incremental theories encoded revealed deception as an ethical violation; individuals with entity theories did not. These findings highlight the importance of implicit beliefs in understanding how trust changes over time.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
We note that though participants had never negotiated with one another prior to this exercise, it is possible that initial impressions may have developed from previous interactions.
Buyers’ theories were not significantly related to any of the dependent measures, and we focus on sellers’ theories in the remaining analyses and discussion.
We thank an anonymous reviewer for noting the importance of establishing the durability of the implicit theory manipulation over time.
Anderson, C., & Shirako, A. (2008). Are individuals’ reputations related to their history of behavior? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 320–333.
Barry, B. (1999). The tactical use of emotion in negotiation. In R. Bies, R. Lewicki, & B. Sheppard (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 7). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bazerman, M. H. (2006). Judgment in managerial decision making. New York: Wiley.
Bergen, R. (1992). Beliefs about intelligence and achievement-related behaviors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.
Bottom, W. P., Gibson, K., Daniels, S. E., & Murnighan, J. K. (2002). When talk is not cheap: Substantive penance and expressions of intent in rebuilding cooperation. Organization Science, 13(5), 497–513.
Boyle, R., & Bonacich, P. (1970). The development of trust and mistrust in mixed-motive games. Sociometry, 33, 123–139.
Butler, J. K. (1999). Trust expectations, information sharing, climate of trust and negotiation effectiveness and efficiency. Group and Organization Management, 24, 217–238.
Chiu, C., Hong, Y., & Dweck, C. S. (1997). Lay dispositionism and implicit theories of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 19–30.
Dirks, K., & Ferrin, D. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12, 450–467.
Dweck, C. S. (1996). Implicit theories as organizers of goals and behavior. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.
Dweck, C. S., Hong, Y., & Chiu, C. (1993). Implicit theories: Individual differences in the likelihood and meaning of dispositional inference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 644–656.
Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C., & Hong, Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments and reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 267–285.
Ekman, P., & O’Sullivan, M. (1991). Who can catch a liar? American Psychologist, 46, 913–920.
Elangovan, A. R., & Shapiro, D. L. (1998). Betrayal of trust in organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 23, 547–566.
Elangovan, A. R., Auer-Rizzi, W., & Szabo, E. (2007). Why don’t I trust you now? An attributional approach to erosion of trust. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 4–24.
Fukuyama, F. (1996). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Gervey, B. M., Chiu, C., Hong, Y., & Dweck, C. S. (1999). Differential use of person information in decisions about guilt versus innocence: The role of implicit theories. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 17–27.
Haselhuhn, M. P., Schweitzer, M. E., & Wood, A. (2010). How implicit beliefs influence trust recovery. Psychological Science, 21, 645–648.
Heslin, P. A., Latham, G. P., & VandeWalle, D. (2005). The effect of implicit person theory on performance appraisals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 842–856.
Heslin, P. A., VandeWalle, D., & Latham, G. P. (2006). Keen to help? Managers’ implicit person theories and their subsequent employee coaching. Personnel Psychology, 59, 871–902.
Hong, Y., Chiu, C., Dweck, C. S., & Sacks, R. (1997). Implicit theories and evaluative processes in person cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 296–323.
Karp, R., Gold, D., & Tan, M. (2006). Bullard houses (dispute resolution exercise). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Harvard Law School, Program on Negotiation.
Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. D., & Dirks, K. T. (2004). Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence-versus integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 104–118.
Kimmel, M. J., Pruitt, D. G., Magenau, J. M., Konar-Goldband, E., & Carnevale, P. J. (1980). Effects of trust, aspiration, and gender on negotiation tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 9–22.
Kramer, R. M. (1996). Divergent realities and convergent disappointments in the hierarchic relation: Trust and the intuitive auditor at work. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kray, L. J., & Haselhuhn, M. P. (2007). Implicit negotiation beliefs and performance: Longitudinal and experimental evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 49–64.
Kray, L. J., & Haselhuhn, M. P. (2012). Male pragmatism in negotiators’ ethical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1124–1131.
Kray, L. J., Locke, C. C. & Haselhuhn, M. P. (2009). In the words of Larry summers: Gender stereotypes and implicit beliefs in negotiations. In A. A. Stanton, M. Day & I. Welpe (Eds.), Neuroeconomics and the firm. Northampton, MA: Elgar.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498.
Lax, D., & Sebenius, J. (1986). The manager as negotiator: Bargaining for cooperation and competitive gain. New York, NY: Free Press.
Levine, E. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2015). Prosocial lies: When deception breeds trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 126, 88–106.
Levy, S. R., Stroessner, S. J., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Stereotype formation and endorsement: The role of implicit theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1421–1436.
Lewicki, R. J. (1983). Lying and deception: A behavioral model. In M. H. Bazerman & R. J. Lewicki (Eds.), Negotiating in organizations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lewicki, R. J. (2006). Trust, trust development and trust repair. In M. Deutsch, P. T. Coleman, & E. C. Marcus (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lount, R. B., Zhong, C. B., Sivanathan, N., & Murnighan, J. K. (2008). Getting off on the wrong foot: The timing of a breach and the restoration of trust. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1601–1612.
Maddux, W. W., Mullen, E., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: Strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 461–468.
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.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
O’Connor, K. M., & Carnevale, P. J. (1997). A nasty but effective negotiation strategy: Misrepresentation of a common-value issue. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 504–515.
Plaks, J. E., Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2005). Violations of implicit theories and the sense of prediction and control: Implications for motivated person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 245–262.
Plaks, J. E., Stroessner, S. J., Dweck, C. S., & Sherman, J. W. (2001). Person theories and attention allocation: Preferences for stereotypic versus counterstereotypic information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 876–893.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 79–891.
Robinson, S. L. (1996). Trust and the breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 574–599.
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.
Schweitzer, M. (2001). Deception in negotiations. In S. Hoch & H. Kunreuther (Eds.), Wharton on Making Decisions (pp. 187–200). New York, NY: Wiley.
Schweitzer, M. E., & Croson, R. T. (1999). Curtailing deception: The impact of direct questions on lies and omissions. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 10, 225–248.
Schweitzer, M. E., Hershey, J., & Bradlow, E. (2006). Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 1–19.
Tamir, M., John, O. P., Srivastava, S., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Implicit theories of emotion: Affective and social outcomes across a major life transition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 731–744.
Thompson, L. L. (1991). Information exchange in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 161–179.
Wong, E. M., Haselhuhn, M. P., & Kray, L. J. (2012). Improving the future by considering the past: The impact of upward counterfactual reflection and implicit beliefs on negotiation performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 403–406.
About this article
Cite this article
Haselhuhn, M.P., Schweitzer, M.E., Kray, L.J. et al. Perceptions of High Integrity Can Persist After Deception: How Implicit Beliefs Moderate Trust Erosion. J Bus Ethics 145, 215–225 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3649-5
- Trust dynamics