Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations

Prior research on trust repair has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. We recognize another form of verbal response: reticence. Although reticence is sometimes used for strategic reasons (e.g., to unjustifiably evade culpability), reticence is also used in many situations because...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: FERRIN, Donald L., Kim, Peter H., Cooper, Cecily D., Dirks, Kurt T.
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2005
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/2527
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2005.18778530
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-3526
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-35262010-09-24T04:18:03Z Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations FERRIN, Donald L. Kim, Peter H. Cooper, Cecily D. Dirks, Kurt T. Prior research on trust repair has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. We recognize another form of verbal response: reticence. Although reticence is sometimes used for strategic reasons (e.g., to unjustifiably evade culpability), reticence is also used in many situations because it is more appropriate than apology and denial. By considering information diagnosticity and belief formation mechanisms through which verbal responses are evaluated, we hypothesized that the effectiveness of reticence vis-à-vis apology and denial depends on the nature of the original trust violation. The hypotheses were tested in a laboratory study of a simulated employment interview. Results indicate that, as a response to an integrity-based violation, reticence produces trust levels that are similar to those of apology but inferior to denial. As a response to a competence-based violation, reticence produces trust levels that are similar to those of denial but inferior to apology. Our results have important implications for those who might use reticence to respond to a perceived trust violation, and also for those who must judge another's reticence. 2005-08-01T07:00:00Z text https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/2527 info:doi/10.5465/AMBPP.2005.18778530 https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2005.18778530 Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Trust apologizing denial integrity attitude employment interviewing Organizational Behavior and Theory
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Trust
apologizing
denial
integrity
attitude
employment interviewing
Organizational Behavior and Theory
spellingShingle Trust
apologizing
denial
integrity
attitude
employment interviewing
Organizational Behavior and Theory
FERRIN, Donald L.
Kim, Peter H.
Cooper, Cecily D.
Dirks, Kurt T.
Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations
description Prior research on trust repair has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. We recognize another form of verbal response: reticence. Although reticence is sometimes used for strategic reasons (e.g., to unjustifiably evade culpability), reticence is also used in many situations because it is more appropriate than apology and denial. By considering information diagnosticity and belief formation mechanisms through which verbal responses are evaluated, we hypothesized that the effectiveness of reticence vis-à-vis apology and denial depends on the nature of the original trust violation. The hypotheses were tested in a laboratory study of a simulated employment interview. Results indicate that, as a response to an integrity-based violation, reticence produces trust levels that are similar to those of apology but inferior to denial. As a response to a competence-based violation, reticence produces trust levels that are similar to those of denial but inferior to apology. Our results have important implications for those who might use reticence to respond to a perceived trust violation, and also for those who must judge another's reticence.
format text
author FERRIN, Donald L.
Kim, Peter H.
Cooper, Cecily D.
Dirks, Kurt T.
author_facet FERRIN, Donald L.
Kim, Peter H.
Cooper, Cecily D.
Dirks, Kurt T.
author_sort FERRIN, Donald L.
title Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations
title_short Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations
title_full Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations
title_fullStr Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations
title_full_unstemmed Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence for Repairing Trust Violations
title_sort silence speaks volumes: the effectiveness of reticence for repairing trust violations
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2005
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/2527
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2005.18778530
_version_ 1770570310048808960