Risk and Trust in Social Exchange: An Experimental Test of a Classical Proposition

The classical exchange theorists proposed that trust is more likely to develop between partners when exchange occurs without explicit negotiations or binding agreements. Under these conditions, the risk and uncertainty of exchange provide the opportunity for partners to demonstrate their trustworthi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of sociology 2000-03, Vol.105 (5), p.1396-1427
Main Authors: Molm, Linda D., Takahashi, Nobuyuki, Peterson, Gretchen
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agreements
Bargaining
Basic Skills
Behavior
Credibility
Cultural customs
Economic benefits
Exchange
Exchange Theory
Experiments
Inequality
Inferences
Interpersonal communication
Interpersonal relationships. Groups. Leadership
Money
Networks
Opportunities
Opportunity costs
Partners
Personality traits
Reciprocity
Risk
Risks
Social evolution
Social exchange theory
Social interaction
Social life
Social psychology
Social structures
Sociology
Theory
Trust
Trust (Psychology)
Uncertainty
Undergraduate Students
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The classical exchange theorists proposed that trust is more likely to develop between partners when exchange occurs without explicit negotiations or binding agreements. Under these conditions, the risk and uncertainty of exchange provide the opportunity for partners to demonstrate their trustworthiness. This study develops the theoretical implications of this proposition and conducts an experimental test that compares levels of both trust and commitment in two forms of direct exchange, negotiated and reciprocal. The results support the classical proposition, showing that reciprocal exchange produces stronger trust and affective commitment than negotiated exchange, and that behaviors signaling the partner's trustworthiness have greater impact on trust in reciprocal exchange.
ISSN:0002-9602
1537-5390
DOI:10.1086/210434