IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0284500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investing to gain others’ trust: Cognitive abstraction increases prosocial behavior and trust received from others

Author

Listed:
  • Gijs van Houwelingen
  • Marius van Dijke

Abstract

Being trusted has many positive implications for one’s wellbeing (e.g., a better career, more satisfying interpersonal relationships). Scholars have suggested that people actively attempt to earn trust. However, it is not clear what makes people invest in actions that may earn them trust. We propose that cognitive abstraction (more than concreteness) facilitates seeing the long-term benefits of performing behaviors (i.e., prosocial behaviors) for gaining trust. We conducted a survey among employees and their supervisors and two yoked experiments—total N = 1098 or 549 pairs. In support of our claim, we find that cognitive abstraction leads to more prosocial behavior, which subsequently increases trust received. Furthermore, the effect of abstraction on the performance of prosocial behavior is limited to situations where such behavior can be observed by others (and thus be a basis for gaining observers’ trust). Our research shows when and why people decide to act in ways that may gain them trust and clarifies how cognitive abstraction influences the display of prosocial behavior and the subsequent trust received from fellow organization members.

Suggested Citation

  • Gijs van Houwelingen & Marius van Dijke, 2023. "Investing to gain others’ trust: Cognitive abstraction increases prosocial behavior and trust received from others," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(4), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0284500
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284500
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0284500
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0284500&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0284500?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan Ariely & Anat Bracha & Stephan Meier, 2009. "Doing Good or Doing Well? Image Motivation and Monetary Incentives in Behaving Prosocially," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 544-555, March.
    2. Niek Hoogervorst & David Cremer & Marius Dijke, 2010. "Why Leaders Not Always Disapprove of Unethical Follower Behavior: It Depends on the Leader’s Self-Interest and Accountability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 29-41, September.
    3. John Child & Guido Möllering, 2003. "Contextual Confidence and Active Trust Development in the Chinese Business Environment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 69-80, February.
    4. Crumpler, Heidi & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "An experimental test of warm glow giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1011-1021, June.
    5. Paolo Antonetti & Stan Maklan, 2016. "An Extended Model of Moral Outrage at Corporate Social Irresponsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 429-444, May.
    6. Rixom, Jessica & Mishra, Himanshu, 2014. "Ethical ends: Effect of abstract mindsets in ethical decisions for the greater social good," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 110-121.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Andreoni, James & Serra-Garcia, Marta, 2021. "Time inconsistent charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    2. Interis, Matthew G. & Haab, Timothy C., 2014. "Overheating Willingness to Pay: Who Gets Warm Glow and What It Means for Valuation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 266-278, August.
    3. Fang, Xing, 2022. "Why we hide good deeds? The selfless and anonymous donation behavior in crowdfunding," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    4. Fosgaard, Toke R. & Soetevent, Adriaan R., 2022. "I will donate later! A field experiment on cell phone donations to charity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 549-565.
    5. Etilé, Fabrice & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2013. "Corporate social responsibility and the economics of consumer social responsibility," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 94(2).
    6. Mirco Tonin & Michael Vlassopoulos, 2009. "Disentangling the sources of pro-social behavior in the workplace: A field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00313, The Field Experiments Website.
    7. Sturm, Bodo & Pei, Jiansuo & Wang, Ran & Löschel, Andreas & Zhao, Zhongxiu, 2019. "Conditional cooperation in case of a global public good – Experimental evidence from climate change mitigation in Beijing," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Diederich, Johannees & Goeschl, Timo, 2014. "Motivational Drivers of the Private Provision of Public Goods: Evidence From a Large Framed Field Experiment," Working Papers 0561, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    9. Britta Butz & Christine Harbring, 2021. "The Effect of Disclosing Identities in a Socially Incentivized Public Good Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-31, April.
    10. Christoph Fuchs & Martijn G. de Jong & Martin Schreier, 2020. "Earmarking Donations to Charity: Cross-cultural Evidence on Its Appeal to Donors Across 25 Countries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4820-4842, October.
    11. Michalis Drouvelis & Benjamin M. Marx, 2021. "Dimensions of donation preferences: the structure of peer and income effects," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 274-302, March.
    12. Jason Chan & Zihong Huang & De Liu & Zhigang Cai, 2024. "Better to Give Than to Receive: Impact of Adding a Donation Scheme to Reward-Based Crowdfunding Campaigns," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 272-293, March.
    13. John A. List & James J. Murphy & Michael K. Price & Alexander G. James, 2019. "Do Appeals to Donor Benefits Raise More Money than Appeals to Recipient Benefits? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment with Pick.Click.Give," NBER Working Papers 26559, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Tetsuya KAWAMURA & Takanori Ida & Kazuhito Ogawa, 2018. "Simultaneous Effect of Monetary and Non-Monetary Interventions on Crowd-Funding Field Experimental Evidence:R&D in New Sources of Energy," Discussion papers e-18-005, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    15. Tianshu Sun & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & Ginger Zhe Jin, 2019. "Mobile Messaging for Offline Group Formation in Prosocial Activities: A Large Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2717-2736, June.
    16. Britta Butz & Christine Harbring, 2022. "Tipping for charity: a field experiment in charitable giving on free walking tours," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(5), pages 781-808, July.
    17. Alt, Marius & Gallier, Carlo, 2022. "Incentives and intertemporal behavioral spillovers: A two-period experiment on charitable giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 959-972.
    18. Claudia Schwirplies & Andreas Ziegler, 2015. "Offset carbon emissions or pay a price premium for avoiding them? A cross-country analysis of motives for climate protection activities," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201504, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    19. Nathalie Spielmann, 2021. "Green is the New White: How Virtue Motivates Green Product Purchase," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 173(4), pages 759-776, November.
    20. Abhishek Bhati & Ruth K. Hansen, 2020. "A literature review of experimental studies in fundraising," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).

    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:plo:pone00:0284500. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.