Trust is a complex concept that has been studied extensively across multiple disciplines, including philosophy, psychology, sociology, economics, and political science. At its core, trust refers to a willingness to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations about another party’s intentions or behaviors. But there is an ongoing debate about whether trust should be conceptualized primarily as an attitude, focusing on expectations and perceptions, or as a behavior, looking at actions and decisions.
Key Points
- Trust can be viewed as an attitude involving positive expectations about another party’s trustworthiness.
- Trust can also be considered a behavioral manifestation based on actually engaging in trusting actions.
- There are reasonable arguments for both perspectives on trust.
- Most experts argue that trust inherently involves both attitudinal and behavioral components.
- The attitudinal and behavioral aspects of trust interact and influence each other.
Trust as an Attitude
One perspective conceptualizes trust primarily as an attitude or psychological state. This view focuses on a trustor’s perceptions, expectations, and willingness to accept vulnerability regarding a trustee. The key components of trust as an attitude include:
- Perceived trustworthiness – The trustor’s assessment of the trustee’s competence, integrity, and benevolence.
- Willingness to be vulnerable – The trustor’s willingness to put themselves at risk by relying on the trustee.
- Subjective probability – The degree of confidence the trustor has in the trustee fulfilling their expectations.
From this attitudinal standpoint, trust is fundamentally about the trustor’s perceptions and expectations regarding the intentions or behaviors of the trustee. Even if the trustee never actually demonstrates their trustworthiness through actions, the trustor may still have an attitude of trust toward them based on positive perceptions and judgments of their character or motives.
Strengths of the Attitudinal View
There are several advantages to conceptualizing trust as an attitude:
- It captures the complexity of trust as a subjective psychological state rather than just observed behaviors.
- It acknowledges that trust involves a “leap of faith” beyond available evidence.
- It fits with research showing trust beliefs shape behaviors and decisions.
- It allows trust to exist even without observable trusting actions.
Overall, the attitudinal perspective provides a nuanced framework for understanding how perceptions of trustworthiness and willingness to accept vulnerability develop and influence subsequent behaviors.
Trust as a Behavior
An alternative perspective views trust primarily as a behavioral manifestation rather than just an attitude. This approach focuses on actual trusting actions and decisions, rather than just expectations. The key behavioral indicators of trust include:
- Dependence – Relying on the trustee to fulfill critical needs or goals.
- Reliance – Delegating responsibility to the trustee or acting on their information/advice.
- Disclosure – Sharing sensitive information with the trustee.
- Forbearance – Refraining from strictly monitoring or controlling the trustee.
From the behavioral standpoint, trust is demonstrated through actions that make one party vulnerable to another based on confident positive expectations. Unless the trustor actually engages in risk-taking behaviors based on perceived trustworthiness, trust is limited to just being an attitude rather than a manifested reality.
Strengths of the Behavioral View
There are also good reasons to focus on the behavioral manifestations of trust:
- It fits with the commonsense idea that “actions speak louder than words.”
- It avoids problems in accurately measuring attitudes and perceptions.
- It captures the tangible impacts of trust in real situations.
- It allows more objective analysis rather than subjective judgments.
Overall, the behavioral perspective provides a more concrete and observable approach to studying how trust directly shapes interactions, relationships, and outcomes.
Integrating Attitudinal and Behavioral Perspectives
While the attitudinal and behavioral views each have merits, most experts argue trust inherently involves both attitudes and behaviors that interact with and influence each other. Some key points about integrating these perspectives include:
- Attitudes often predict subsequent behaviors, but also get shaped by experiences over time.
- Behaviors provide evidence to inform and update attitudinal judgments.
- Both perspectives are needed for a comprehensive understanding of trust.
- It is difficult to completely isolate attitudinal and behavioral aspects of trust.
- A complete theory of trust requires integrating both attitudinal and behavioral components.
Rather than purely an attitude or purely a behavior, trust is best understood as a dynamic process that evolves over time through complex interactions between attitudinal and behavioral influences. Neither orientations fully captures trust on its own.
Evidence for the Attitudinal and Behavioral Aspects of Trust
Many different lines of research provide evidence for the importance of both the attitudinal and behavioral dimensions of trust. Here is a review of some key findings:
Attitudinal Influences on Trust
- Perceived benevolence, competence, and integrity predict willingness to trust.
- Trust beliefs shape engagement in trusting behaviors.
- Trust attitudes mediate the effects of reputations on trusting actions.
- Individual propensity to trust correlates with actual trusting behaviors.
Behavioral Manifestations of Trust
- Trust behaviors satisfy core motives for self-protection and social bonding.
- Engagement in trusting actions elicits positive reciprocal behaviors.
- Trust-related behaviors cultivate perceptions of trustworthiness.
- Observing trusting behaviors provides evidence of underlying trust attitudes.
Interactions Between Attitudes and Behaviors
- Trusting attitudes and behaviors reinforce each other over time.
- Betrayals of trust erode both trusting attitudes and behaviors.
- Rebuilding trust requires restoring positive attitudes and engaging in trusting actions.
- Trust development occurs through a spiral of attitudinal and behavioral feedback.
Overall, while attitudes and behaviors each contribute something unique, trust arises through their dynamic interaction over time. This points to the value of integrating both perspectives.
Practical Implications
Understanding the attitudinal and behavioral dimensions of trust also has important practical implications in domains like management, healthcare, e-commerce, and public policy. For example:
- Managers should cultivate trust by demonstrating competence, integrity and concern for employees’ needs and interests.
- Doctors can develop patients’ trust by displaying expertise, dependability and transparency.
- Online vendors should provide security guarantees and customer testimonials to foster trust attitudes and purchasing behaviors.
- Governments can encourage citizen trust and compliance by enacting fair policies through legitimate procedures.
Effectively developing, maintaining, and repairing trust requires strategies that target both the attitudinal and behavioral aspects of trust.
Key Findings and Conclusions
In summary, research supports several key conclusions about the nature of trust:
- Trust includes both attitudinal and behavioral components.
- Attitudes of perceived trustworthiness shape engagement in trusting behaviors.
- Behaviors that demonstrate trust provide evidence that informs trust attitudes.
- Trust develops over time through reinforcing interactions between attitudes and behaviors.
- Understanding trust requires integrating both attitudinal and behavioral perspectives.
Overall, the debate over whether trust is primarily an attitude or behavior is misleading since trust inherently involves both. For a complete understanding of trust, we need to examine how perceptions and expectations shape actions, while experiences of trusting behaviors also feed back to shape attitudes. By integrating both perspectives, researchers can develop more insightful models of how trust builds, erodes and repairs over time.
| Attitudinal Aspects of Trust | Behavioral Aspects of Trust |
|---|---|
| Perceived trustworthiness | Dependence on trustee |
| Willingness to be vulnerable | Reliance on trustee |
| Confidence in positive expectations | Disclosure of sensitive information |
| Perceived competence, benevolence, integrity | Refraining from control/monitoring |
This table summarizes some of the key attitudinal and behavioral manifestations of trust and how they relate to one another.
Addressing Counterarguments
While most experts agree that trust involves both attitudes and behaviors, some counterarguments exist. Here are some responses:
Trust can be studied more rigorously by focusing just on behaviors
While studying concrete behaviors allows more rigorous measurement, this sacrifices understanding the complexity of trust judgments and expectations that shape behaviors. We gain key insights from studying the subjective attitudinal aspects of trust.
You can have trust without any observable trusting behaviors
While trust attitudes may exist without accompanying actions, this represents incomplete trust unlikely to manifest in real situations until it is behaviorally demonstrated. Purely attitudinal trust has less practical relevance.
Some definitions of trust emphasize attitudes over behaviors or vice versa
Yes, some conceptual definitions lean more toward either attitudes or behaviors. But most experts agree both are inherent in a complete understanding of trust. Definitions limited to just attitudes or behaviors are overly narrow.
People often trust without thoughtful attitudinal judgments
In some routine situations, people engage in trusting behaviors without much conscious deliberation. But even habitual trust still involves underlying attitudinal expectations that guide those actions.
Future Research Directions
Further research can provide additional insights into the complex interplay between the attitudinal and behavioral aspects of trust. Some key questions for future studies include:
- How are specific trust attitudes formed and updated based on different behavioral experiences over time?
- Under what conditions do trust attitudes or behaviors have a stronger influence on outcomes?
- How does the balance between attitudinal and behavioral trust shift in different contexts and relationships?
- Can trust attitudes substitute for trusting behaviors under conditions of constrained action?
Studying such issues will further advance our integrative understanding of trust as a dynamic phenomenon rooted in both attitudes and behaviors interacting over time. Additional research along these lines promises to be valuable.
References
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.909
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926622
Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35(4), 651-665. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01454.x
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. F. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926617
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344–354. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24348410