Restoring trust harder when it is broken early in relationship

January 7, 2009

In relationships built on trust, a bad first impression can be harder to overcome than a betrayal that occurs after ties are established, a new study suggests.

While betraying trust is never good for a relationship, the results show that early violations can be particularly devastating, and plant seeds of doubt that may never go away, said Robert Lount, co-author of the study and assistant professor of management and human resources at Ohio State University's Fisher College of Business.

"First impressions matter when you want to build a lasting trust," Lount said.

"If you get off on the wrong foot, the relationship may never be completely right again. It's easier to rebuild trust after a breach if you already have a strong relationship."

While the importance of first impressions may seem obvious, Lount said there is still a common theme in popular culture that suggests many great relationships start off badly.

"Our results fly in the face of this Hollywood notion of hating someone at first sight but then developing a wonderful, passionate relationship," he said. "The likelihood of that happening in real life is pretty low."

The study appears in a recent issue of the journal Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

In two related experiments, Lount and his colleagues had college students participate in a game in which their partners violated their trust either right at the beginning of the game or somewhere in the middle.

The goal was to see how much the students were willing to cooperate with the partner after trust was breached.

The researchers used a famous game in psychology called the prisoner's dilemma. In this version, the two players had to decide separately and privately whether they were going to cooperate with each other or defect against their partner in exchange for a monetary reward.

If they both separately decided to cooperate, they would earn $24 each. If one player decided to defect and the other decided to cooperate, the defector would earn $30, while the person who decided to cooperate would earn only $6. If they both decided to defect against their partners, they would both earn $12.

The payoffs for cooperating were designed to increase cooperation, he said. In addition, participants read a "Tutorial on Cooperation" that described the benefits of cooperation in prisoner's dilemma games.

To encourage the participants to take the task seriously, the experimenter announced that several participants would be randomly chosen to receive some of the actual money they won in the game.

In the first experiment, 138 students played multiple rounds of the game on a computer that they were told was networked to a student in another room.

But they were actually playing with a computer that was programmed to defect at specific points during the more than 30 rounds of the game.

Some participants were paired with a computer that defected against them immediately, in the first two rounds of the game, while others defected in rounds 6 and 7 or rounds 11 and 12. In all cases, the computer was programmed to cooperate for 30 rounds following the defection, regardless of what the participant did. Another group of students were paired with computers that were programmed to always cooperate with the participants throughout the experiment.

Participants were notified on their computer when there were only 10 rounds left in the game.

"The end game is a very critical time, because if you defect, your partner doesn't have much of an opportunity to get back at you," Lount said. "If you don't trust your partner, the last rounds of the game will be when you're most likely to defect."

In this experiment, participants who experienced a breach of trust during the first two trials of the game were also the least likely to cooperate at the end of the game. They cooperated less than 70 percent of the final 10 rounds, suggesting they had the least trust in their partners.

Participants who experienced a trust breach latest in the game - after 10 rounds of cooperation - showed the most cooperation at the end of the game, cooperating more than 90 percent of the time. That was actually slightly higher than participants whose computer partner never defected during the game.

Lount noted that in all cases, the computer defected against the participants the same number of times - just twice during the more than 30 rounds of the experiment. But the timing of the breaches was key.

"An immediate breach of trust is particularly difficult to overcome, and later breaches are considerably less harmful," he said.

In a questionnaire participants took after the experiment, those who experienced the immediate breach rated their partners as less trustworthy than did those whose partner defected later in the game.

In a second experiment, the researchers essentially repeated the first experiment with 108 students, but this time the students answered a short set of questions concerning their perceptions and feelings about their partner immediately following a breach and every 10 trials thereafter.

Participants who experienced the immediate breaches of trust had the most negative evaluations of their partners. Although the interpersonal evaluations improved over time, even after 20 rounds of cooperation following the breach, an immediate breach still generated more negative evaluations than did no breaches or late breaches.

"Our results suggest that immediate breaches are especially costly because they seriously damage the impressions people have about their partner, and that's hard to repair," he said.

Source: Ohio State University

Explore further: Using games to reduce drug errors

Related Stories

Using games to reduce drug errors

June 7, 2016
An educational board game designed to help frontline healthcare professionals to understand, recognise and minimise medication errors has been developed by Focus Games Ltd in partnership with academics from the School of ...

Trust through the olfactory fragrance of lavender

January 13, 2015
People's trust in others increases after smelling the olfactory fragrance of lavender. Leiden psychologists Roberta Sellaro and Lorenza Colzato published their findings in Frontiers in Psychology.

Researchers shed light on why people trust

August 11, 2015
Trust matters whether it's love, money or another part of our everyday lives that requires risk, and a new study by a Dartmouth brain researcher and his collaborators sheds light on what motivates people to make that leap ...

Trust through food

October 23, 2013
People's trust in others increases after eating food that contains the amino acid tryptophan, found in fish, soya, eggs and spinach. Leiden psychologist Lorenza Colzato and her colleagues at the Universities of Leiden and ...

In longterm relationships, the brain makes trust a habit

September 3, 2013
(Medical Xpress)—After someone betrays you, do you continue to trust the betrayer? Your answer depends on the length of the relationship, according to research by sociologist Karen Cook of Stanford University and her colleagues. ...

Gossip can have social and psychological benefits

January 17, 2012
For centuries, gossip has been dismissed as salacious, idle chatter that can damage reputations and erode trust. But a new study from the University of California, Berkeley, suggests rumor-mongering can have positive outcomes ...

Recommended for you

Gene associated with schizophrenia risk regulates neurodevelopment

September 25, 2017
A gene associated with the risk of schizophrenia regulates critical components of early brain development, according to a new study led by researchers from Penn State University. The gene is involved in the translation of ...

For a better 'I,' there needs to be a supportive 'we'

September 25, 2017
If you're one of those lucky individuals with high motivation and who actively pursues personal growth goals, thank your family and friends who support you.

Child abuse affects brain wiring

September 25, 2017
Researchers from the McGill Group for Suicide Studies, based at the Douglas Mental Health University Institute and McGill University's Department of Psychiatry, have just published research in the American Journal of Psychiatry ...

Babies can learn that hard work pays off

September 21, 2017
If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. A new study from MIT reveals that babies as young as 15 months can learn to follow this advice. The researchers found that babies who watched an adult struggle at two different ...

Study links brain inflammation to suicidal thinking in depression

September 21, 2017
Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) have increased brain levels of a marker of microglial activation, a sign of inflammation, according to a new study in Biological Psychiatry by researchers at the University of ...

Oxytocin turns up the volume of your social environment

September 20, 2017
Before you shop for the "cuddle" hormone oxytocin to relieve stress and enhance your social life, read this: a new study from the University of California, Davis, suggests that sometimes, blocking the action of oxytocin in ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

eldowan
not rated yet Jan 07, 2009
Come on Physorg, this was covered TODAY!! HERE!

IN THE SAME SECTION!!!

http://www.physor...012.html
http://www.physor...792.html


Does this *really* warrant a new article, The only difference between the two is insignificant?

WTF is going on, come on guys get your stuff together.

This is really getting asinine.

Previous example: http://www.physor...043.html

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.