IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v169y2022ics0749597822000036.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender differences in interpersonal trust: Disclosure behavior, benevolence sensitivity and workplace implications

Author

Listed:
  • Qiu, Judy
  • Kesebir, Selin
  • Günaydin, Gül
  • Selçuk, Emre
  • Wasti, S. Arzu

Abstract

Across four studies (N = 4,727), we investigate gender differences in interpersonal trust in work relationships. Drawing on gendered socialization experiences, we propose that feeling able to engage in self-disclosure (disclosure-based trust) is a more fundamental aspect of interpersonal trust for women than for men. Because self-disclosure entails social and emotional risks, we further expect and find that female trustors are more sensitive to others’ benevolence when forming interpersonal trust judgments. Lastly, we show that these gender differences in disclosure-based trust and benevolence sensitivity are associated with divergent responses to benevolent others. Specifically, we test a moderated mediation model and find that benevolent supervisors are associated with higher quality supervisor relationships and greater well-being for women than for men, mediated through higher levels of disclosure-based trust. We discuss the implications of these findings for work relationships and career outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiu, Judy & Kesebir, Selin & Günaydin, Gül & Selçuk, Emre & Wasti, S. Arzu, 2022. "Gender differences in interpersonal trust: Disclosure behavior, benevolence sensitivity and workplace implications," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:169:y:2022:i:c:s0749597822000036
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000036
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104119?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cao, Jiyin & Galinsky, Adam D., 2020. "The Diversity-Uncertainty-Valence (DUV) model of generalized trust development," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 49-64.
    2. Kris Byron & Blaine Landis, 2020. "Relational Misperceptions in the Workplace: New Frontiers and Challenges," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 223-242, January.
    3. Ralph Bosch & Toon Taris, 2014. "Authenticity at Work: Development and Validation of an Individual Authenticity Measure at Work," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, February.
    4. Cheshin, Arik & Amit, Adi & van Kleef, Gerben A., 2018. "The interpersonal effects of emotion intensity in customer service: Perceived appropriateness and authenticity of attendants' emotional displays shape customer trust and satisfaction," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 97-111.
    5. Wasti, Syeda Arzu & Tan, Hwee Hoon & Erdil, Selin Eser, 2011. "Antecedents of Trust across Foci: A Comparative Study of Turkey and China," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 279-302, July.
    6. Belmi, Peter & Pfeffer, Jeffrey, 2018. "The Effect of Economic Consequences on Social Judgment and Choice: Reward Interdependence and the Preference for Sociability versus Competence," Research Papers repec:ecl:stabus:3640, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    7. SimanTov-Nachlieli, Ilanit & Har-Vardi, Liron & Moran, Simone, 2020. "When negotiators with honest reputations are less (and more) likely to be deceived," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 68-84.
    8. Kennedy, Jessica A. & Kray, Laura J. & Ku, Gillian, 2017. "A social-cognitive approach to understanding gender differences in negotiator ethics: The role of moral identity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 28-44.
    9. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2011. "Gender and Competition," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 601-630, September.
    10. Evans, Martin G., 1985. "A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 305-323, December.
    11. Gibson, Kerry Roberts & Harari, Dana & Marr, Jennifer Carson, 2018. "When sharing hurts: How and why self-disclosing weakness undermines the task-oriented relationships of higher status disclosers," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 25-43.
    12. Buchan, Nancy R. & Croson, Rachel T.A. & Solnick, Sara, 2008. "Trust and gender: An examination of behavior and beliefs in the Investment Game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 466-476, December.
    13. van den Akker, Olmo R. & van Assen, Marcel A.L.M. & van Vugt, Mark & Wicherts, Jelte M., 2020. "Sex differences in trust and trustworthiness: A meta-analysis of the trust game and the gift-exchange game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    14. Kurt T. Dirks & Donald L. Ferrin, 2001. "The Role of Trust in Organizational Settings," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 450-467, August.
    15. Branzei, Oana & Vertinsky, Ilan & Camp II, Ronald D., 2007. "Culture-contingent signs of trust in emergent relationships," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 61-82, September.
    16. Aamir Chughtai & Marann Byrne & Barbara Flood, 2015. "Linking Ethical Leadership to Employee Well-Being: The Role of Trust in Supervisor," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 653-663, May.
    17. Syeda Arzu Wasti & Hwee Hoon Tan & Selin Eser Erdil, 2011. "Antecedents of Trust across Foci: A Comparative Study of Turkey and China," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 7(2), pages 279-302, July.
    18. Kim, Peter H. & Dirks, Kurt T. & Cooper, Cecily D. & Ferrin, Donald L., 2006. "When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 49-65, January.
    19. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    20. Currall, Steven C. & Judge, Timothy A., 1995. "Measuring Trust between Organizational Boundary Role Persons," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 151-170, November.
    21. Lee, Fiona, 1997. "When the Going Gets Tough, Do the Tough Ask for Help? Help Seeking and Power Motivation in Organizations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 336-363, December.
    22. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chiara Buizza & Clarissa Ferrari & Giulio Sbravati & Jessica Dagani & Herald Cela & Giuseppe Rainieri & Alberto Ghilardi, 2023. "Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Well-Being, Social Relationships and Academic Performance in a Sample of University Freshmen: A Propensity Score Match Evaluation Pre- and Post-Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(15), pages 1-19, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Levine, Emma E. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2015. "Prosocial lies: When deception breeds trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 88-106.
    2. Michael Pirson & Deepak Malhotra, 2011. "Foundations of Organizational Trust: What Matters to Different Stakeholders?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 1087-1104, August.
    3. Bejarano, Hernán & Gillet, Joris & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2021. "Trust and trustworthiness after negative random shocks," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    4. van den Akker, Olmo R. & van Assen, Marcel A.L.M. & van Vugt, Mark & Wicherts, Jelte M., 2020. "Sex differences in trust and trustworthiness: A meta-analysis of the trust game and the gift-exchange game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    5. Fang,Sheng & Goh,Chorching & Roberts,Mark & Xu,L. Colin & Zeufack,Albert G., 2020. "Female Business Leaders, Business and Cultural Environment, and Productivity around the World," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9275, The World Bank.
    6. Heinz, Matthias & Juranek, Steffen & Rau, Holger A., 2012. "Do women behave more reciprocally than men? Gender differences in real effort dictator games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 105-110.
    7. Chaudhuri, Ananish & Cruickshank, Amy & Sbai, Erwann, 2015. "Gender differences in personnel management: Some experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 20-32.
    8. Kennedy, Jessica A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2018. "Building trust by tearing others down: When accusing others of unethical behavior engenders trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 111-128.
    9. Hiromasa Takahashi & Junyi Shen & Kazuhito Ogawa, 2020. "Gender-specific reference-dependent preferences in the experimental trust game," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 25-38, January.
    10. Lena Detlefsen & Andreas Friedl & Katharina Lima de Miranda & Ulrich Schmidt & Matthias Sutter, 2018. "Are economic preferences shaped by the family context? The impact of birth order and siblings’ sex composition on economic preferences," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2018_12, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    11. Fei Song & C. Bram Cadsby & Yunyun Bi, 2012. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Guanxi in China: An Experimental Investigation," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 8(2), pages 397-421, July.
    12. Lena Detlefsen & Andreas Friedl & Katharina Lima Miranda & Ulrich Schmidt & Matthias Sutter, 2024. "Are economic preferences shaped by the family context? The relation of birth order and siblings’ gender composition to economic preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 1-31, August.
    13. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-03974756 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Campbell, Sandy & Gneezy, Uri, 2024. "Smartphone use decreases trustworthiness of strangers," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    15. Taylor, Matthew P., 2020. "Heterogeneous motivation and cognitive ability in the lab," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. Maurice E. Schweitzer & Teck-Hua Ho & Xing Zhang, 2018. "How Monitoring Influences Trust: A Tale of Two Faces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 253-270, January.
    17. Sophie Steelandt & Valérie Dufour & Marie-Hélène Broihanne & Bernard Thierry, 2012. "Children Base Their Investment on Calculated Pay-Off," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-8, March.
    18. Greig, Fiona, 2010. "Gender and the social costs of claiming value: An experimental approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 549-562, December.
    19. José García-Montalvo & Marta Reynal-Querol, 2019. "Gender and Credit Risk: A View From the Loan Officer’s Desk," Working Papers 1076, Barcelona School of Economics.
    20. Giovanni Di Bartolomeo & Stefano Papa, 2019. "The Effects of Physical Activity on Social Interactions: The Case of Trust and Trustworthiness," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 20(1), pages 50-71, January.
    21. Banerjee, Ritwik, 2016. "Corruption, norm violation and decay in social capital," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 14-27.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:169:y:2022:i:c:s0749597822000036. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.