This project experimentally investigates specificity of trust in two, qualitatively different types of relationships–communal-sharing and market-pricing relationships. In the former people are guided by the other person’s benefit and welfare, while in the latter they care about their self-interest—how much they get out of their investment and whether the repayment is of a comparable value. These modes of relating are characterized by different mindsets and rules of behavior. Previous research has demonstrated that market mindset affects people’s generosity, helping, empathy, moral decisions, and sense of control. However, up to this point, no empirical investigation has consistently examined how the type of relationship affects the way people build and develop trust.
Trust, understood as a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations of another person’s intentions or behavior, is an integral part of close relationships, but it is also present in market exchanges, as it can be instrumentally used as a catalyst for more efficient transactions. We propose that trust experienced in market and communal relationships is a qualitatively different phenomenon with regard to its purpose, mechanisms, and supporting factors. In communal relationships, people trust that their partners will not betray them and abuse their vulnerability. In market relationships, people trust that others will complete tasks competently and on time, or simply that the other party will comply with the terms of the contract and restrain from the temptation to cheat when an unfair action is accessible and easy to undertake. Yet, as people seem resistant to situations that extend market-pricing norms into domains of life such as close, communal relations (‘taboo trade-offs’), factors that might build trust in the market pricing domain, could be detrimental to its formation in communal relationship, and vice versa.
Up to this point, most studies have examined trust within the bounds of a specific field—psychology, economics, or organizational behavior—which makes it difficult to compare results across domains; therefore, it remains virtually unknown how the dynamics of trust in one domain differ from those in other domain. Our project is guided by an interdisciplinary approach to the study of trust. We aim at integrating the behavioral approach by measuring trust as behavior, with the psychological approach by analyzing the cognitive, affective, and motivational aspects associated with the formation of trust in the two types of relationships.
The project is divided into three interrelated research tasks. In Task 1, we will examine cues that trigger the perception of a specific relation as communal or market-like, and investigate how this perception relates to the level of trust exhibited in such a situation. We plan to conduct a meta-analysis exploring how experimental design features that cue communal-sharing or market-pricing modes affect the level of trust in Trust Game, followed by a series of experiments testing the impact of market-pricing and communal-sharing cues and their consistency on the perception of specific situations as market or communal, and on trust. In Task 2, we will investigate the specificity of trust in communal and market contexts with respect to the aim of trust and the aim of the relationship. In Task 3, we will explore mechanisms and factors fostering the formation of trust in communal and market relationships. In this task, we will test four mechanisms responsible for the differences in trust formation in communal and market relationships: 1) sensitivity to emotions; 2) the propensity to rely on cost-benefit analyses; 3) broad vs narrow bandwidths of trust; and 4) direct vs indirect components of reputation.
We expect that the results of our project will have an impact on the development of such disciplines as social and economic psychology, as well as behavioral economics, and that it will provide a platform for designing further on interconnections between relational context and trust. The research that we propose will create a basis both for developing a better understanding of the conditions under which people are more strongly motivated to trust others, and also for creating societally profitable solutions that diminish negative consequences of distrust. These characteristics of the present research clearly speak in favor of its pioneering nature.