IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jtrust/v1y2010i1p23-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring trust in organisational research: Review and recommendations

Author

Listed:
  • Bill McEvily
  • Marco Tortoriello

Abstract

Although the organisational literature is increasingly converging on common definitions and theoretical conceptualisations of trust, it is unclear whether the same is true for the measures used to operationalise trust. In this paper, we review the organisational literature to assess the degree of sophistication and convergence across studies in how trust has been measured. Our analysis of 171 papers published over 48 years revealed that the state of the art of trust measurement is rudimentary and highly fragmented. In particular, we identified a total of 129 different measures of trust. Moreover, in only 24 instances were we able to verify that a previously developed and validated measure of trust had been replicated verbatim, and 11 of these replications were by the same authors who originated the measure. In addition to the limited degree of replication, the measurement of trust in the organisational literature is characterised by weak evidence in support of construct validity and limited consensus on operational dimensions. What makes these findings even more surprising is that our review also identified several measures of trust that have been carefully developed and thoroughly validated. We profile those measures with strong measurement properties and discuss their trade-offs. We also present a framework for measuring trust that provides guidance to researchers for selecting or developing a measure of trust and propose an agenda for future research with an emphasis on resolving enduring debates in the literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Bill McEvily & Marco Tortoriello, 2010. "Measuring trust in organisational research: Review and recommendations," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 23-63, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jtrust:v:1:y:2010:i:1:p:23-63
    DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2011.552424
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21515581.2011.552424
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21515581.2011.552424?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jtrust:v:1:y:2010:i:1:p:23-63. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJTR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.