“I Think You Are Trustworthy, Need I Say More?” The Factor Structure and Practicalities of Trustworthiness Assessment

Abstract

Two popular models of trustworthiness have garnered support over the years. One has postulated three aspects of trustworthiness as state-based antecedents to trust. Another has been interpreted to comprise two aspects of trustworthiness. Empirical data shows support for both models, and debate remains as to the theoretical and practical reasons researchers may adopt one model over the other. The present research aimed to consider this debate by investigating the factor structure of trustworthiness. Taking items from two scales commonly employed to assess trustworthiness, we leveraged structural equation modeling to explore which theoretical model is supported by the data in an organizational trust context. We considered an array of first-order, second-order, and bifactor models. The best-fitting model was a bifactor model comprising one general trustworthiness factor and ability, benevolence, and integrity grouping factors. This model was determined to be essentially unidimensional, though this is qualified by the finding that the grouping variables accounted for significant variance with for several organizational outcome criteria. These results suggest that respondents typically employ a general factor when responding to items assessing trustworthiness, and researchers may be better served treating the construct as unidimensional or engaging in scale parceling of their models to reflect this response tendency more accurately. However, the substantial variance accounted by the grouping variables in hierarchical regression suggest there may be contexts in which it would be acceptable to consider the theoretical factors of ability, benevolence, and integrity independent of general trustworthiness.

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,855

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-09

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael Lee
Yale University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Xin: Being Trustworthy.Winnie Sung - 2020 - International Philosophical Quarterly 60 (3):271-286.
E-Trust and Reputation.Thomas W. Simpson - 2011 - Ethics and Information Technology 13 (1):29-38.
Trust and Trustworthiness.Stephen Wright - 2010 - Philosophia 38 (3):615-627.
Trustworthiness and Moral Character.Thomas W. Simpson - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (3):543-557.
Confucian Trustworthiness and the Practice of Business in China.Daryl Koehn - 2001 - Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (3):415-429.
The Importance of Being Trustworthy.Derek Sellman - 2006 - Nursing Ethics 13 (2):105-115.
Do Corporations Have a Duty to Be Trustworthy?Nikolas Kirby, Andrew Kirton & Aisling Crean - 2018 - Journal of the British Academy 6 (Supplementary issue 1):75-129.
Trustworthiness of Autonomous Systems.S. Kate Devitt - 2018 - In Hussein A. Abbass, Jason Scholz & Darryn Reid (eds.), Foundations of Trusted Autonomous Systems. Springer. pp. 161-184.