Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences

Living Edition
| Editors: Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Todd K. Shackelford


  • Isabel ThielmannEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_561-1



Interpersonal trust can be understood as “a risky choice of making oneself dependent on the actions of another in a situation of uncertainty, based upon some expectation of whether the other will act in a benevolent fashion despite an opportunity to betray” (Thielmann and Hilbig 2015, p. 251).


Whether among romantic partners, friends, colleagues, or even strangers, trust plays a pivotal role for all kinds of social interactions and interpersonal relationships. For example, imagine confiding a personal secret to a friend, handing over your keys to your neighbor for the time you are on holidays, or asking a stranger in the train to keep an eye on your luggage while you visit the restrooms: All these instances are basically a matter of trust. In other words, in all these situations, there is uncertainty about how the trusted party will behave and, in consequence, a riskof experiencing some disutility due to being...

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


  1. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & De Vries, R. E. (2014). The HEXACO honesty-humility, agreeableness, and emotionality factors: A review of research and theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(2), 139–152. doi:10.1177/1088868314523838.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ben-Ner, A., & Halldorsson, F. (2010). Trusting and trustworthiness: What are they, how to measure them, and what affects them. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(1), 64–79. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2009.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. A. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122–142. doi:10.1006/game.1995.1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bohnet, I., & Zeckhauser, R. (2004). Trust, risk and betrayal. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 55(4), 467–484. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2003.11.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Das, T. K., & Teng, B.-S. (2004). The risk-based view of trust: A conceptual framework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(1), 85–116. doi:10.1023/B:JOBU.0000040274.23551.1b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fleeson, W., & Leicht, C. (2006). On delineating and integrating the study of variability and stability in personality psychology: Interpersonal trust as illustration. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(1), 5–20. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Krueger, J. I., DiDonato, T. E., & Freestone, D. (2012). Social projection can solve social dilemmas. Psychological Inquiry, 23(1), 1–27.Google Scholar
  8. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. doi:10.2307/258792.Google Scholar
  9. Thielmann, I., & Hilbig, B. E. (2014). Trust in me, trust in you: A social projection account of the link between personality, cooperativeness, and trustworthiness expectations. Journal of Research in Personality, 50(3), 61–65. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2014.03.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Thielmann, I., & Hilbig, B. E. (2015). Trust: An integrative review from a person-situation perspective. Review of General Psychology, 19(3), 249–277. doi:10.1037/gpr0000046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Zhao, K., & Smillie, L. D. (2015). The role of interpersonal traits in social decision making: Exploring sources of behavioral heterogeneity in economic games. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(3), 277–302. doi:10.1177/1088868314553709.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Koblenz-LandauLandauGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Monika Wróbel
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of PsychologyUniversity of LodzLodzPoland