Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence in Comparison to Apology and Denial for Responding to Integrity- and Competence-Based Trust Violations

Donald L. Ferrin, Peter H. Kim, Cecily Cooper, Kurt T. Dirks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

148 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Prior research on responses to trust violations has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. The authors extended this research by studying another type of verbal response that is often used to respond to trust violations but has not been considered in the trust literature: reticence. An accused party may use reticence in a sincere and even legitimate attempt to persuade a trustor to withhold judgment. Yet, by considering information diagnosticity and belief formation mechanisms through which verbal responses influence trust, the authors argue that reticence is a suboptimal response because it combines the least effective elements of apology and denial. Specifically, reticence is a suboptimal response to an integrity violation because, like apology, it fails to address guilt. And reticence is a suboptimal response to a competence violation because, like denial, it fails to signal redemption. Results from 2 laboratory studies, simulating different contexts and using research participants from 2 different countries, provide support for the prediction. The results offer 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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)893-908
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
Volume92
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2007

Fingerprint

Mental Competency
Research
Guilt
Denial (Psychology)

Keywords

  • attributions
  • belief formation
  • information diagnosticity
  • reticence
  • trust repair

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Silence Speaks Volumes : The Effectiveness of Reticence in Comparison to Apology and Denial for Responding to Integrity- and Competence-Based Trust Violations. / Ferrin, Donald L.; Kim, Peter H.; Cooper, Cecily; Dirks, Kurt T.

In: Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92, No. 4, 01.07.2007, p. 893-908.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{56ba8b4ada364f2bac469d70684a5288,
title = "Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence in Comparison to Apology and Denial for Responding to Integrity- and Competence-Based Trust Violations",
abstract = "Prior research on responses to trust violations has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. The authors extended this research by studying another type of verbal response that is often used to respond to trust violations but has not been considered in the trust literature: reticence. An accused party may use reticence in a sincere and even legitimate attempt to persuade a trustor to withhold judgment. Yet, by considering information diagnosticity and belief formation mechanisms through which verbal responses influence trust, the authors argue that reticence is a suboptimal response because it combines the least effective elements of apology and denial. Specifically, reticence is a suboptimal response to an integrity violation because, like apology, it fails to address guilt. And reticence is a suboptimal response to a competence violation because, like denial, it fails to signal redemption. Results from 2 laboratory studies, simulating different contexts and using research participants from 2 different countries, provide support for the prediction. The results offer 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.",
keywords = "attributions, belief formation, information diagnosticity, reticence, trust repair",
author = "Ferrin, {Donald L.} and Kim, {Peter H.} and Cecily Cooper and Dirks, {Kurt T.}",
year = "2007",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.893",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "92",
pages = "893--908",
journal = "Journal of Applied Psychology",
issn = "0021-9010",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Silence Speaks Volumes

T2 - The Effectiveness of Reticence in Comparison to Apology and Denial for Responding to Integrity- and Competence-Based Trust Violations

AU - Ferrin, Donald L.

AU - Kim, Peter H.

AU - Cooper, Cecily

AU - Dirks, Kurt T.

PY - 2007/7/1

Y1 - 2007/7/1

N2 - Prior research on responses to trust violations has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. The authors extended this research by studying another type of verbal response that is often used to respond to trust violations but has not been considered in the trust literature: reticence. An accused party may use reticence in a sincere and even legitimate attempt to persuade a trustor to withhold judgment. Yet, by considering information diagnosticity and belief formation mechanisms through which verbal responses influence trust, the authors argue that reticence is a suboptimal response because it combines the least effective elements of apology and denial. Specifically, reticence is a suboptimal response to an integrity violation because, like apology, it fails to address guilt. And reticence is a suboptimal response to a competence violation because, like denial, it fails to signal redemption. Results from 2 laboratory studies, simulating different contexts and using research participants from 2 different countries, provide support for the prediction. The results offer 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.

AB - Prior research on responses to trust violations has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. The authors extended this research by studying another type of verbal response that is often used to respond to trust violations but has not been considered in the trust literature: reticence. An accused party may use reticence in a sincere and even legitimate attempt to persuade a trustor to withhold judgment. Yet, by considering information diagnosticity and belief formation mechanisms through which verbal responses influence trust, the authors argue that reticence is a suboptimal response because it combines the least effective elements of apology and denial. Specifically, reticence is a suboptimal response to an integrity violation because, like apology, it fails to address guilt. And reticence is a suboptimal response to a competence violation because, like denial, it fails to signal redemption. Results from 2 laboratory studies, simulating different contexts and using research participants from 2 different countries, provide support for the prediction. The results offer 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.

KW - attributions

KW - belief formation

KW - information diagnosticity

KW - reticence

KW - trust repair

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548819320&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548819320&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.893

DO - 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.893

M3 - Article

C2 - 17638453

AN - SCOPUS:34548819320

VL - 92

SP - 893

EP - 908

JO - Journal of Applied Psychology

JF - Journal of Applied Psychology

SN - 0021-9010

IS - 4

ER -