IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jtrust/v10y2020i1p4-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

We can’t go on together with suspicious minds: Forecasting errors in evaluating the appreciation of denials

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher P. Reinders Folmer
  • David De Cremer
  • Maarten Wubben
  • Marius van Dijke

Abstract

In light of public examples of false denials, it is unsurprising that people’s beliefs about denials often are negative. However, inconsistent with such beliefs, denials often are sincere, and can facilitate trust repair. To illuminate this mismatch, we advance a framework based on Construal Level Theory, to explain how people may make a forecasting error when predicting their responses to denials. In two experimental studies, we reveal that people who actually received a denial after a possible transgression (a) were less suspicious, and experienced greater trust, and (b) displayed more trusting behavior than people who imagined this. These results suggest that people underestimate the effectiveness of denials in the reconciliation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher P. Reinders Folmer & David De Cremer & Maarten Wubben & Marius van Dijke, 2020. "We can’t go on together with suspicious minds: Forecasting errors in evaluating the appreciation of denials," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 4-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jtrust:v:10:y:2020:i:1:p:4-22
    DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2020.1738944
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21515581.2020.1738944
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21515581.2020.1738944?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:10:y:2020:i:1:p:4-22. 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.