IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgw/081.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inviting or avoiding deception through trust? Conceptual exploration of an ambivalent relationship

Author

Listed:
  • Möllering, Guido

Abstract

The paper explores conceptually the relationship between trust and deception. The author advances five main propositions, which concern deceptive signals of trustworthiness, the suspension of uncertainty in trust, the moral implications of trusting and deceiving, the trustor's self-deception, and the reversibility of trust. The overall conclusion is that trust and deception both enable and prevent one another and that this ambivalent relationship is due to the leaps and lapses of faith that characterize trust and distrust. Beyond implications for further research on trust and deception, the trust-deception ambivalence is practically relevant for making better sense of cases of deception in private and public life against the background of trust relationships that enable, prevent, require, and prohibit deception - all at the same time.

Suggested Citation

  • Möllering, Guido, 2008. "Inviting or avoiding deception through trust? Conceptual exploration of an ambivalent relationship," MPIfG Working Paper 08/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgw:081
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/41690/1/574281835.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frédérique Six, 2005. "The Trouble with Trust," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3778.
    2. Beckert, Jens, 2005. "Trust and the Performative Construction of Markets," MPIfG Discussion Paper 05/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Jordi Brandts & Gary Charness, 2003. "Truth or Consequences: An Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(1), pages 116-130, January.
    4. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ronald Peeters & Marc Vorsatz & Markus Walzl, 2013. "Truth, Trust, and Sanctions: On Institutional Selection in Sender–Receiver Games," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 115(2), pages 508-548, April.
    2. Jordi Brandts & Arno Riedl & Frans van Winden, 2004. "Competition and Well-Being," Working Papers 120, Barcelona School of Economics.
    3. Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Ilkka Leppänen, 2017. "Cheap talk and cooperation in Stackelberg games," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(2), pages 261-285, June.
    4. Joseph P. Gaspar & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2021. "Confident and Cunning: Negotiator Self-Efficacy Promotes Deception in Negotiations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 139-155, June.
    5. Sascha Behnk & Iván Barreda-Tarrazona & Aurora García-Gallego, 2018. "Punishing liars—How monitoring affects honesty and trust," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-30, October.
    6. Behnk, Sascha & Barreda-Tarrazona, Iván & García-Gallego, Aurora, 2014. "The role of ex post transparency in information transmission—An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 45-64.
    7. Uri Gneezy, 2005. "Deception: The Role of Consequences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 384-394, March.
    8. Florian Ederer & Ernst Fehr, 2007. "Deception and Incentives. How Dishonesty Undermines Effort Provision," IEW - Working Papers 341, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    9. Gruss, Laura & Piotti, Geny, 2010. "Blurring the lines: Strategic deception and self-deception in markets," MPIfG Discussion Paper 10/13, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    10. Guilherme Silva Fracarolli, 2021. "The Effects of Institutional Measures: Geographical Indication in Mercosur and the EU," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Beckert, Jens & Wehinger, Frank, 2011. "In the shadow illegal markets and economic sociology," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/9, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    12. Sven Hoeppner, 2014. "The unintended consequence of doorstep consumer protection: surprise, reciprocation, and consistency," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 247-276, October.
    13. Sherwood, Charles, 2022. "A lie is a lie: the ethics of lying in business negotiations," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113331, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Assaf Razin & Efraim Sadka & Chi-Wa Yuen, 1999. "An Information-Based Model of Foreign Direct Investment: The Gains from Trade Revisited," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 6(4), pages 579-596, November.
    15. Konduru, Srinivasa & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Magnier, Alexandre, 2009. "GMO Testing Strategies and Implications for Trade: A Game Theoretic Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. König, Philipp J. & Pothier, David, 2018. "Safe but fragile: Information acquisition, sponsor support and shadow bank runs," Discussion Papers 15/2018, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    17. Ritu Agarwal & Michelle Dugas & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & P. K. Kannan, 2020. "Emerging technologies and analytics for a new era of value-centered marketing in healthcare," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 9-23, January.
    18. Villas-Boas, Sofia B, 2020. "Reduced Form Evidence on Belief Updating Under Asymmetric Information," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt08c456vk, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    19. Yaofeng Fu & Ruokun Huang & Yiran Sheng, 2017. "Labor Contract Law -An Economic View," Papers 1702.03977, arXiv.org.
    20. Ghosh, Suman, 2007. "Job mobility and careers in firms," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 603-621, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:mpifgw:081. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.html .

    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.