From the Head and the Heart: Locating Cognition- and Affect-Based Trust in Managers' Professional Networks

Abstract

This article investigates the configuration of cognition-and affect-based trust in managers' professional networks, examining how these two types of trust are associated with relational content and structure. Results indicate that cognition-based trust is positively associated with economic resource, task advice, and career guidance ties, whereas affect-based trust is positively associated with friendship and career guidance ties but negatively associated with economic resource ties. The extent of embeddedness in a network through positive ties increases affect-based trust, whereas that through negative ties decreases cognition-based trust. These findings illuminate how trust arises in networks and inform network research that invokes trust to explain managerial outcomes.

Differences between paid and unpaid social services for beneficiaries

“…Beliefs regarding competence and responsibility (Butler, 1991;Cook & Wall, 1980), as well as about reliability and dependability have been identified as important elements in the development and maintenance of trusting relationships (Zucker, 1986). In contrast, affective trust involves empathy, rapport, and self-disclosure (Chua et al, 2008). Given its special and relational nature, volunteers are likely to be better at creating affective trust.…”

“…Trust can be based on either cognition or affect (Lewis & Weigert, 1985). Cognitive trust involves a calculating and instrumental assessment of information (Chua, Ingram, & Morris, 2008). Beliefs regarding competence and responsibility (Butler, 1991;Cook & Wall, 1980), as well as about reliability and dependability have been identified as important elements in the development and maintenance of trusting relationships (Zucker, 1986).…”

An Identity-Based Approach to Social Enterprise

“…Such identities have specific behavioral expectations and help to define "who one is in society" (Bidwell, Won, Barbulesu, & Mollick, 2014). They also provide a foundation for the formation of deep professional and peer relations that are tied to the role (Chua, Ingram, & Morris, 2008). As such, these identities tend to carry strong internal and external accountability pressures -and are thus salient -resulting in frequent enactment and the development of focused knowledge and competencies Dokko, Wilk & Rothbard, 2009).…”

Explaining Cohesion Linkages in Workgroups: The Cooperative Communication in Collectivism and High Power Distance Workgroup Context

“…Parallel to this, the supervisor-subordinate relationships, coworkers' relationships and communication do not develop in a vacuum, but necessitate exchanges between the supervisor-subordinate and coworker within different contexts in the work group (see Contarctor, Wasserman & Faust, 2006). Naturally, such activities have consequences on the members desire to maintain a membership in their respective work group (Chua, Ingram & Morris, 2008).…”