We can’t go on together with suspicious minds: Forecasting errors in evaluating the appreciation of denials

Christopher P. Reinders Folmer*, David De Cremer, Maarten Wubben, Marius van Dijke

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

In light of public examples of false denials, it is unsurprising that people’s beliefs about denials often are negative. However, inconsistent with such beliefs, denials often are sincere, and can facilitate trust repair. To illuminate this mismatch, we advance a framework based on Construal Level Theory, to explain how people may make a forecasting error when predicting their responses to denials. In two experimental studies, we reveal that people who actually received a denial after a possible transgression (a) were less suspicious, and experienced greater trust, and (b) displayed more trusting behavior than people who imagined this. These results suggest that people underestimate the effectiveness of denials in the reconciliation process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4-22
Number of pages19
JournalJournal of Trust Research
Volume10
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jan 2020

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Peter Ping Li.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'We can’t go on together with suspicious minds: Forecasting errors in evaluating the appreciation of denials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this