IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v43y2014icp16-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing trust: First impressions and experience

Author

Listed:
  • Yu, Michael
  • Saleem, Muniba
  • Gonzalez, Cleotilde

Abstract

Using the repeated Trust Game, we investigated how first impressions and experience affect trusting dispositions, beliefs, and behaviors. As in previous research, trusting beliefs and trust-related behaviors were greater at the start of the game for partners with trustworthy faces; and higher later in the game for partners who reciprocated. Three additional findings extended beyond the previous research. First, by measuring the discrete components of trusting beliefs rather than an umbrella “trustworthiness” measure, we confirmed that first impressions and experience influence judgments of competence, benevolence, and integrity. Moreover, we found suggestive evidence that perceptions of benevolence and integrity updated more quickly with experience than perceptions of competence. Second, by looking at trusting beliefs at the start of two consecutive repeated Trust Games, we found that judgments of competence, benevolence, and integrity continue to be influenced by trustworthy facial appearances, even after previous beliefs based on facial appearances were disconfirmed. Third, we found increased investment with a partner at the start of a second repeated Trust Game, even when participants expected their partners to betray them. Overall, our results clarify our understanding of how first impressions and experience influence trusting beliefs; provides evidence that changes in the repeated Trust Game represents learning about a specific partner rather than revisions of trusting dispositions; and highlights important distinctions between trusting beliefs and trust-related behaviors.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu, Michael & Saleem, Muniba & Gonzalez, Cleotilde, 2014. "Developing trust: First impressions and experience," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 16-29.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:16-29
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2014.04.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487014000233
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joep.2014.04.004?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben-Ner, Avner & Halldorsson, Freyr, 2010. "Trusting and trustworthiness: What are they, how to measure them, and what affects them," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 64-79, February.
    2. Scharlemann, Jorn P. W. & Eckel, Catherine C. & Kacelnik, Alex & Wilson, Rick K., 2001. "The value of a smile: Game theory with a human face," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 617-640, October.
    3. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    4. Wit, Arjaan P. & Wilke, Henk A. M., 1992. "The effect of social categorization on cooperation in three types of social dilemmas," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 135-151, March.
    5. Hamermesh, Daniel S & Biddle, Jeff E, 1994. "Beauty and the Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1174-1194, December.
    6. Kim, Peter H. & Dirks, Kurt T. & Cooper, Cecily D. & Ferrin, Donald L., 2006. "When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 49-65, January.
    7. Daniel Z. Levin & Rob Cross, 2004. "The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1477-1490, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Curtale, Riccardo & Liao, Feixiong & van der Waerden, Peter, 2021. "User acceptance of electric car-sharing services: The case of the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 266-282.
    2. Arbel, Yuval & Fialkoff, Chaim & Kerner, Amichai, 2016. "Does the first impression matter? Efficiency testing of tenure-choice decision," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 223-237.
    3. Gylfason, Haukur Freyr & Olafsdottir, Katrin, 2017. "Does Gneezy's cheap talk game measure trust?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 143-148.
    4. Billur Aksoy & Catherine C. Eckel & Rick K. Wilson, 2018. "Can I Rely on You?," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Eric van Dijk & Varia Makagonova & Erik W. de Kwaadsteniet & Manon Schutter, 2017. "Deterrence-based trust in bargaining: Introducing a new experimental paradigm," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 71-89, January.
    6. Josep Petchamé & Ignasi Iriondo & Xavi Canaleta & David Riu & Silvia Necchi, 2021. "Engaging ICT Engineering Undergraduates in a Management Subject through First Day of Class Activities: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-20, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ert, Eyal & Fleischer, Aliza & Magen, Nathan, 2016. "Trust and reputation in the sharing economy: The role of personal photos in Airbnb," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 62-73.
    2. Levine, Emma E. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2015. "Prosocial lies: When deception breeds trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 88-106.
    3. McEvily, Bill & Radzevick, Joseph R. & Weber, Roberto A., 2012. "Whom do you distrust and how much does it cost? An experiment on the measurement of trust," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 285-298.
    4. Nault, Kelly A. & Sezer, Ovul & Klein, Nadav, 2023. "It’s the journey, not just the destination: Conveying interpersonal warmth in written introductions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    5. Schwieren, Christiane & Sutter, Matthias, 2008. "Trust in cooperation or ability? An experimental study on gender differences," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 494-497, June.
    6. Yiting Guo & Jason Shachat & Matthew J. Walker & Lijia Wei, 2021. "Viral social media videos can raise pro-social behaviours when an epidemic arises," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(2), pages 120-138, December.
    7. Gereke, Johanna & Schaub, Max & Baldassarri, Delia, 2018. "Ethnic diversity, poverty and social trust in Germany: Evidence from a behavioral measure of trust," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15.
    8. Martin Korndörfer & Boris Egloff & Stefan C. Schmukle, 2015. "A Large Scale Test of the Effect of Social Class on Prosocial Behavior," Working Papers 1601, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    9. Fei Song & C. Bram Cadsby & Yunyun Bi, 2012. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Guanxi in China: An Experimental Investigation," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 8(2), pages 397-421, July.
    10. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Burns, Justine, 2012. "Race, diversity and pro-social behavior in a segmented society," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 366-378.
    12. Lönnqvist, Jan-Erik & Verkasalo, Markku & Walkowitz, Gari & Wichardt, Philipp C., 2015. "Measuring individual risk attitudes in the lab: Task or ask? An empirical comparison," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 254-266.
    13. Leunissen, Joost M. & Cremer, David De & Reinders Folmer, Christopher P., 2012. "An instrumental perspective on apologizing in bargaining: The importance of forgiveness to apologize," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 215-222.
    14. Bonein, Aurélie & Serra, Daniel, 2009. "Gender pairing bias in trustworthiness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 779-789, October.
    15. Maurice E. Schweitzer & Teck-Hua Ho & Xing Zhang, 2018. "How Monitoring Influences Trust: A Tale of Two Faces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 253-270, January.
    16. Eckel, Catherine C. & Wilson, Rick K., 2004. "Is trust a risky decision?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 447-465, December.
    17. Haesebrouck, Katlijn & Van den Abbeele, Alexandra & Williamson, Michael G., 2021. "Building trust through knowledge sharing: Implications for incentive system design," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    18. Rigdon, Mary, 2009. "Trust and reciprocity in incentive contracting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 93-105, May.
    19. Zürn, Michael & Topolinski, Sascha, 2017. "When trust comes easy: Articulatory fluency increases transfers in the trust game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 74-86.
    20. Alessandro Innocenti & Maria Grazia Pazienza, 2006. "Altruism and Gender in the Trust Game," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 005, University of Siena.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trust; Trust Game; Social cognition; First impressions; Repeated interaction;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:eee:joepsy:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:16-29. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joep .

    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.