大学生人际信任的内隐社会认知特点研究
|
摘要
人际信任是影响个体人际关系的重要因素,也是个体社会适应的重要标志。已有研究从社会学、经济学和心理学等学科视角对人际信任的概念、结构、功能、影响因素及形成与发展机制等方面已进行了广泛的探讨。但是,人际信任从其本质上来说是一个涉及多维度、多层次的复杂的综合社会心理现象,因此研究者对它的思考与研究显得纷繁复杂,不同的学科取向、研究视角、研究层次以及研究者各种不同的解释均导致人际信任研究较难取得一致的结果。
受到内隐记忆研究的推动和启发,Greenwald和Banaji (1995)根据社会信息加工的意识和无意识,提出了内隐社会认知(implicit social cognition)的概念及其研究的体系和范式,明确地指出个体的社会行为具有内隐性和自动化的特征。人际信任产生于人际互动的过程当中,是个体对与人际交往有关的社会信息进行判断、评估和认知加工的结果。那么,人际信任是否也存在内隐加工成分,且这种内隐成分指导个体对人际互动过程中的社会信息进行内隐加工?现有内隐社会认知的研究方法和范式是否也适用于人际互动过程中的信任研究?本研究在对国内外有关人际信任研究进行详细梳理和总结的基础上,从内隐社会认知的视角对大学生人际信任的内隐特征、大学生对不同人际情境中人际信任相关信息的内隐社会加工阶段、各加工阶段的特点及其可改变性进行了研究,旨在更好地理解大学生人际信任的现状及其发展变化,对改善大学生的人际关系,促进其社会适应具有重要的理论价值和实践意义。
本研究采用内隐社会认知研究方法,对内隐人际信任进行了系统探讨。本研究分为3个部分,由5个实验构成,依次涉及大学生内隐人际信任的特征、不同人际信任水平大学生在内隐社会认知的三个阶段的特点及大学生内隐人际信任的可变性等问题。
根据以上研究的结果及分析讨论,得出如下结论：
1.内隐态度上,人们更倾向于用表示信任的词汇来形容他人,从而表现出对他人信任的倾向。
2.内隐人际信任存在于高外显信任水平的被试群体中,而不存在于低外显信任水平的被试群体中。
3.大学生内隐人际信任与外显人际信任之间存在低相关,是两个相对独立的结构。
4.词的情绪属性导致不同信任水平的被试均出现内隐人际知觉易化现象,词的积极情绪属性(积极信任词汇)加快了高人际信任水平被试对信任词的知觉速度,而词的消极情绪属性(消极不信任词汇)加快了低人际信任水平被试对不信任词汇的知觉速度。
5.高人际信任水平被试在人际信任社会认知印象形成过程中出现了显著的启动效应,而低人际信任水平被试则未曾出现启动效应。但是,对于不同评价对象,高信任水平大学生出现了不同类型的启动效应。高人际信任水平被试对亲人进行评价时,不延迟时最近激活的概念或结构有优势,但在长延迟时频繁启动的概念或结构将占优势,这支持了突触模式。高人际信任水平被试对熟悉人进行评价时,刺激类型及是否延迟主效应均显著,具体表现为不延迟时有优势的概念或结构(近因即最近激活的刺激)在长延迟时也有优势,支持了电传递模式。高人际信任水平被试对陌生人进行评价时,启动刺激类型主效应显著,深入分析发现,为不延迟时有优势的概念或结构(近因即最近激活的刺激)在长延迟时也有优势,支持了电传递模式。关于人际信任的内隐社会认知图式具有条件性和对象性。
6.在不同交往对象启动条件下,被试对信任词和不信任词汇在反应速度方面表现出一定的偏好。具体表现为在亲人词启动条件下,被试对信任词汇反应更快；在熟悉人词启动条件下,被试对不信任词汇反应更快；而对于陌生人则无差异。
7.内隐人际信任具有一定的稳定性,本研究中阈下评价性条件反射技术未能改变大学生内隐人际信任。
综上所述,本研究在以下方面有所创新：第一,探索并证实了大学生内隐人际信任的存在性,并初步分析了大学生内隐人际信任的特征；第二,提出并验证了内隐人际信任的三阶段模型,即内隐人际知觉、内隐人际印象和内隐人际判断；第三,考察了大学生内隐人际信任的稳定性和可变性；第四,从内隐社会认知角度,对大学生人际信任的内隐特征、大学生对不同人际情境中社会信息的内隐加工特点及其可改变性进行了研究,为人际信任研究提供了新思路。
Interpersonal trust is important factor affecting the interpersonal relationships of individuals, and significant symbol of individual social adaptation. Studies have conducted extensive discussion from sociological, economical and psychological point of view on the aspects of concept, structure, function, influencing factors, formation, and development mechanism of interpersonal trust. Nevertheless, given interpersonal trust is a complex social psychological phenomenon with multiple layers of psychology, culture, society and system. Therefore, considerations and studies upon it by researchers are complex. Different discipline orientation, study perspective, study levels, and a variety of explanations, have made the study of interpersonal trust be difficult to reach agreement.
Promoted and enlightened by the studies on implicit memory, Greenwald and Banaji (1995), with basis on consciousness and unconsciousness of social information processing, proposed the concept of implicit social cognition and its study system and model, and clearly pointed out that individual social behavior possesses implication and features of automation. Interpersonal trust comes from the process of interpersonal interaction, and it is resulted from individuals'judging, assessing and processing about the social informations in human communication. So whether the composition of implicit process is also existed in interpersonal trust, and directs individuals'implicit processing about social information of interpersonal communication? Whether the method and paradigm of research of social cognition is suitable to the research of interpersonal trust. Confrom the angle of implicit social cognition, the study carried out exploration on implicit features of college students interpersonal trust, implicit features of how college students process social information in different interpersonal context, and its convertibility, to better comprehend the status quo and development and change of college students interpersonal trust, which is of significant theoretical value and practice meaning to improve college students interpersonal relationship and facilitate their social adaptation.
This study adopted the research method of implicit social cognition, and systematically discussed implicit interpersonal trust. The study is divided into3parts, consisted of5experiments, and by turn touches upon issues of existence of college students' implicit interpersonal trust, features of college students of different interpersonal trust levels in the three phases of implicit cognition, and the convertibility of college students' implicit interpersonal trust.
Based on study results, analysis and discussion, conclusions are drawn as below:
1. In implicit attitude, people are more prone to use words that represent trust to describe others, so as to show their trust.
2. Implicit interpersonal trust exists intestees with high external trust level, and does not exist in testees with low external trust level.
3. There is low correlation between implicit interpersonal trust and explicit interpersonal trust among college students. Explicit interpersonal trust and implicit interpersonal trust are relatively independent from each other.
4. For high trust level testees, response time for trust words is evidently less than for distrust words. Priming effects are apparent. For high trust level testees, response time for trust words under the condition of describing contact objects is notly lower than that under the condition of judgment. For low trust level testees, response time for distrust words under the condition of describing contact objects is notly lower than that under the condition of judgment. This indicates that property of emotion of words accelerates the testee's speed of perception, and possesses facilitatory effects for search of social information property.
5. High trust level testees presented evident priming effects in the process of interpersonal trust social cognition impression formation, while low trust level testees did not show priming effects. However, for different evaluation objects, college students with high trust level turned up different types of priming effects. When evaluating family, high trust level testees had advantages in non-delay most recent activation concept or structure, and long-delay frequent priming concept or structure. This supported synaptic mode. When evaluating acquaintance, high trust level testees showed significant main effects in stimuli type and delay or non-delay. Namely, concept or structure with advantage in non-delay (recently activated stimuli) also possessed advantage in long-delay. This supported electric transfer mode. When evaluating strangers, high trust level testees showed significant main effects in type of priming stimuli. In-depth analysis found that concept or structure with advantage in non-delay (recently activated stimuli) also possessed advantage in long-delay. This backed up electric transfer mode. These results demonstrated that social cognition schematism relevant to interpersonal trust has conditionity and objectivity.
6. Under the condition of different priming of contact objects, testees displayed certain preferences towards trust wording and distrust wording in response speed. Under the condition of words of relatives, testees responded fast on trust words; under the condition of words of priming of acquaintance, testees responded fast on distrust words; while there was no differences observed for strangers.
7. Implicit interpersonal trust possesses certain stability, the technology of conditioned reflex of subliminal evaluative can hardly change implicit interpersonal trust among college students.
To sum up, the study possesses innovation in aspects below:First, it explored and proved the existence of implicit interpersonal trust among college students, and conducted preliminary analysis on the features of college students'implicit interpersonal trust. Second, it proposed and verified the three-phases model of implicit interpersonal trust, namely, implicit social cognition, implicit social impression, and implicit social thinking. Third, it investigated the stability and convertibility of college students' implicit interpersonal trust. Fourth, from the angle of implicit social cognition, it carried out exploration on the implicit features of college students'interpersonal trust, features of how college students process implication of social information in different interpersonal context(s), and its convertibility, and offered new train of thought for study on interpersonal trust.
受到内隐记忆研究的推动和启发,Greenwald和Banaji (1995)根据社会信息加工的意识和无意识,提出了内隐社会认知(implicit social cognition)的概念及其研究的体系和范式,明确地指出个体的社会行为具有内隐性和自动化的特征。人际信任产生于人际互动的过程当中,是个体对与人际交往有关的社会信息进行判断、评估和认知加工的结果。那么,人际信任是否也存在内隐加工成分,且这种内隐成分指导个体对人际互动过程中的社会信息进行内隐加工?现有内隐社会认知的研究方法和范式是否也适用于人际互动过程中的信任研究?本研究在对国内外有关人际信任研究进行详细梳理和总结的基础上,从内隐社会认知的视角对大学生人际信任的内隐特征、大学生对不同人际情境中人际信任相关信息的内隐社会加工阶段、各加工阶段的特点及其可改变性进行了研究,旨在更好地理解大学生人际信任的现状及其发展变化,对改善大学生的人际关系,促进其社会适应具有重要的理论价值和实践意义。
本研究采用内隐社会认知研究方法,对内隐人际信任进行了系统探讨。本研究分为3个部分,由5个实验构成,依次涉及大学生内隐人际信任的特征、不同人际信任水平大学生在内隐社会认知的三个阶段的特点及大学生内隐人际信任的可变性等问题。
根据以上研究的结果及分析讨论,得出如下结论：
1.内隐态度上,人们更倾向于用表示信任的词汇来形容他人,从而表现出对他人信任的倾向。
2.内隐人际信任存在于高外显信任水平的被试群体中,而不存在于低外显信任水平的被试群体中。
3.大学生内隐人际信任与外显人际信任之间存在低相关,是两个相对独立的结构。
4.词的情绪属性导致不同信任水平的被试均出现内隐人际知觉易化现象,词的积极情绪属性(积极信任词汇)加快了高人际信任水平被试对信任词的知觉速度,而词的消极情绪属性(消极不信任词汇)加快了低人际信任水平被试对不信任词汇的知觉速度。
5.高人际信任水平被试在人际信任社会认知印象形成过程中出现了显著的启动效应,而低人际信任水平被试则未曾出现启动效应。但是,对于不同评价对象,高信任水平大学生出现了不同类型的启动效应。高人际信任水平被试对亲人进行评价时,不延迟时最近激活的概念或结构有优势,但在长延迟时频繁启动的概念或结构将占优势,这支持了突触模式。高人际信任水平被试对熟悉人进行评价时,刺激类型及是否延迟主效应均显著,具体表现为不延迟时有优势的概念或结构(近因即最近激活的刺激)在长延迟时也有优势,支持了电传递模式。高人际信任水平被试对陌生人进行评价时,启动刺激类型主效应显著,深入分析发现,为不延迟时有优势的概念或结构(近因即最近激活的刺激)在长延迟时也有优势,支持了电传递模式。关于人际信任的内隐社会认知图式具有条件性和对象性。
6.在不同交往对象启动条件下,被试对信任词和不信任词汇在反应速度方面表现出一定的偏好。具体表现为在亲人词启动条件下,被试对信任词汇反应更快；在熟悉人词启动条件下,被试对不信任词汇反应更快；而对于陌生人则无差异。
7.内隐人际信任具有一定的稳定性,本研究中阈下评价性条件反射技术未能改变大学生内隐人际信任。
综上所述,本研究在以下方面有所创新：第一,探索并证实了大学生内隐人际信任的存在性,并初步分析了大学生内隐人际信任的特征；第二,提出并验证了内隐人际信任的三阶段模型,即内隐人际知觉、内隐人际印象和内隐人际判断；第三,考察了大学生内隐人际信任的稳定性和可变性；第四,从内隐社会认知角度,对大学生人际信任的内隐特征、大学生对不同人际情境中社会信息的内隐加工特点及其可改变性进行了研究,为人际信任研究提供了新思路。
Interpersonal trust is important factor affecting the interpersonal relationships of individuals, and significant symbol of individual social adaptation. Studies have conducted extensive discussion from sociological, economical and psychological point of view on the aspects of concept, structure, function, influencing factors, formation, and development mechanism of interpersonal trust. Nevertheless, given interpersonal trust is a complex social psychological phenomenon with multiple layers of psychology, culture, society and system. Therefore, considerations and studies upon it by researchers are complex. Different discipline orientation, study perspective, study levels, and a variety of explanations, have made the study of interpersonal trust be difficult to reach agreement.
Promoted and enlightened by the studies on implicit memory, Greenwald and Banaji (1995), with basis on consciousness and unconsciousness of social information processing, proposed the concept of implicit social cognition and its study system and model, and clearly pointed out that individual social behavior possesses implication and features of automation. Interpersonal trust comes from the process of interpersonal interaction, and it is resulted from individuals'judging, assessing and processing about the social informations in human communication. So whether the composition of implicit process is also existed in interpersonal trust, and directs individuals'implicit processing about social information of interpersonal communication? Whether the method and paradigm of research of social cognition is suitable to the research of interpersonal trust. Confrom the angle of implicit social cognition, the study carried out exploration on implicit features of college students interpersonal trust, implicit features of how college students process social information in different interpersonal context, and its convertibility, to better comprehend the status quo and development and change of college students interpersonal trust, which is of significant theoretical value and practice meaning to improve college students interpersonal relationship and facilitate their social adaptation.
This study adopted the research method of implicit social cognition, and systematically discussed implicit interpersonal trust. The study is divided into3parts, consisted of5experiments, and by turn touches upon issues of existence of college students' implicit interpersonal trust, features of college students of different interpersonal trust levels in the three phases of implicit cognition, and the convertibility of college students' implicit interpersonal trust.
Based on study results, analysis and discussion, conclusions are drawn as below:
1. In implicit attitude, people are more prone to use words that represent trust to describe others, so as to show their trust.
2. Implicit interpersonal trust exists intestees with high external trust level, and does not exist in testees with low external trust level.
3. There is low correlation between implicit interpersonal trust and explicit interpersonal trust among college students. Explicit interpersonal trust and implicit interpersonal trust are relatively independent from each other.
4. For high trust level testees, response time for trust words is evidently less than for distrust words. Priming effects are apparent. For high trust level testees, response time for trust words under the condition of describing contact objects is notly lower than that under the condition of judgment. For low trust level testees, response time for distrust words under the condition of describing contact objects is notly lower than that under the condition of judgment. This indicates that property of emotion of words accelerates the testee's speed of perception, and possesses facilitatory effects for search of social information property.
5. High trust level testees presented evident priming effects in the process of interpersonal trust social cognition impression formation, while low trust level testees did not show priming effects. However, for different evaluation objects, college students with high trust level turned up different types of priming effects. When evaluating family, high trust level testees had advantages in non-delay most recent activation concept or structure, and long-delay frequent priming concept or structure. This supported synaptic mode. When evaluating acquaintance, high trust level testees showed significant main effects in stimuli type and delay or non-delay. Namely, concept or structure with advantage in non-delay (recently activated stimuli) also possessed advantage in long-delay. This supported electric transfer mode. When evaluating strangers, high trust level testees showed significant main effects in type of priming stimuli. In-depth analysis found that concept or structure with advantage in non-delay (recently activated stimuli) also possessed advantage in long-delay. This backed up electric transfer mode. These results demonstrated that social cognition schematism relevant to interpersonal trust has conditionity and objectivity.
6. Under the condition of different priming of contact objects, testees displayed certain preferences towards trust wording and distrust wording in response speed. Under the condition of words of relatives, testees responded fast on trust words; under the condition of words of priming of acquaintance, testees responded fast on distrust words; while there was no differences observed for strangers.
7. Implicit interpersonal trust possesses certain stability, the technology of conditioned reflex of subliminal evaluative can hardly change implicit interpersonal trust among college students.
To sum up, the study possesses innovation in aspects below:First, it explored and proved the existence of implicit interpersonal trust among college students, and conducted preliminary analysis on the features of college students'implicit interpersonal trust. Second, it proposed and verified the three-phases model of implicit interpersonal trust, namely, implicit social cognition, implicit social impression, and implicit social thinking. Third, it investigated the stability and convertibility of college students' implicit interpersonal trust. Fourth, from the angle of implicit social cognition, it carried out exploration on the implicit features of college students'interpersonal trust, features of how college students process implication of social information in different interpersonal context(s), and its convertibility, and offered new train of thought for study on interpersonal trust.
引文
[1]Agathe Evin, Carole Seve, Jacques Saury. (2012). Construction of trust judgments within cooperative dyads. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy,17(1),1-18.
[2]Anthony M. Evans. William Revelle. (2008). Survey and behavioral measurements of interpersonal trust. Journal of Research in Personality,42(6),1585-1593.
[3]Bradach, J. L. & R.G.Eccles. (1989). Price, Authority and Trust:From Ideal Types to Plural Forms, Annual Review of Sociology,15(1),97-118.
[4]Barber B. (1983).The logic and limits of trust. New Brunswick, NJ:Rutgers University Press.
[5]Bargh J A, Pietromonaco P. (1982). Automatic information processing and social perception:the influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3),437-449.
[6]C. Ashley Fulmer, Michele J. Gelfand. (2012). At What Level (and in Whom) We Trust Trust Across Multiple Organizational Levels. Journal of Management,38(4), 1167-1230.
[7]C. Eisenegger, M. Naef, R. Snozzi, M. Heinrichs& E. Fehr. (2010). Prejudice and truth about the effect of testosterone on human bargaining behaviour. Nature,463, 356-359.
[8]Carla Sacchi (2004).Interpersonal trust in different ages.Inter disciplinaria, Numero Especial,21(99),87-107.
[9]Christian Lukas, Jens Robert Schondube. (2012).Trust and adaptive learning in implicit contracts. Review of Managerial Science,6(1),1-32.
[10]Colquitt, Jason A.; Scott, Brent A.; LePine, Jeffery. (2007). A Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity:A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,92 (4),909-927.
[11]Dag Wollebaek, Susanne Wallman Lundasen, Lars Tragardh. (2012). Three Forms of Interpersonal Trust:Evidence from Swedish Municipalities. Scandinavian Political Studies,35 (4),319-346.
[12]Das, T. K. & B.Teng. (1998). "Between Trust and Control Developing Confidence in Partner Cooperation in Alliances", Academy ofManagementReview,23(3), 491-512.
[13]Das T.K., Bing-Sheng Teng (2004).Therisk-based view of trust:a conceptual framework. Journal of Businessand Psychology,19(1),85-116.
[14]Dasgupta N, McGhee D E, Greenwald A. G & Banaji M R. (2000). Automatic Preference for White Americans:Eliminating the Familiarity Explanation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,36(3),316-328.
[15]De Houwer J. (2003). The Extrinsic Affective Simon Task. Experimental Psychology,50(2),77-85.
[16]De Houwer J. (2002). The implicit association test as a tool for studying dysfunctional associations in psychopathology:strengths and limitations. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry,33 (2),115-133.
[17]Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution,1(2), 265-279.
[18]Dirks, Kurt T., Ferrin, Donald L.(2002). Trust in leadership:Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology,87(4), 611-628.
[19]Donald L.Ferin, Kurt T. Dirks (2006).Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationship on interpersonal trust.Journal of Applied Psycholohy,91(4),870-883.
[20]Dunn, J. R. & Schwertzer, M. E. (2005). Feeling and beliving:the influence of emotion on trust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,88,736-748.
[21]Dasgupta N., Greenwald A. G (2001). On the male ability and disliked individual. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,81,800-814.
[22]Fazio R H, Olson M A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research:their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology,54(1),297-327.
[23]Ferrin, Donald L.Dirks, Kurt T.Shah, Pri P. (2006). Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4),870-883.
[24]Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives:Positive emotions, induced through meditation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,95, 1045-1062.
[25]Good, D. (1988). Individuals, Interpersonal Relations and Trust, in Gambetta D. (ed.), Trust:Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, NewYork:Basil Blackwel,1,31-48.
[26]Granovetier M. (1985). Economic action and social structure:the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,91(3),481-510.
[27]Greenwald A G, Banaji M R. (1995). Implicit Social Cognition:Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review,102(1),4-27.
[28]Greenwald A G, Farnham S D. (2000). Using the Implicit Association Test to Measure Self-Esteem and Self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,79 (6),1022-1038.
[29]Greenwald A G, McGhee D E, Schwartz J L K. (1998). Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition:The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74(6),1464-1480.
[30]Greenwald A G, Nosek B A, Banaji M R. (2003). Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test:An Improved Scoring Algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(2),197-216.
[31]HARDIN R. Trust and trustworthiness. New York:Russell Sage Foundation,2002.
[32]Hosmer, L. T.,1995, "Trust:The Connection Link between Organizational Theory and Philosophical Eth-ics", Academy ofManagementReview,20(2),379-403.
[33]Harker, L., & Keltner, D. (2001). Expressions of positive emotions in women's college yearbook pictures and their relationship to personality and life outcomes across adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,80,112-114.
[34]Johnson-George, C. & W. C. Swap. (1982). Measurement of Specific Interpersonal Trust:Construction and Validation of a Scale to Assess Trust in a Specific Other.Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology,43(6),1306-1317.
[35]John K.Rempel, John GHolmes, Mark P.Zanna. (1985). Trust in close relationships. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology,49(1),95-112.
[36]Karpinshi A, Steinman R B. (2006). The Single Category Implicit Association Test: as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,91(1),16-32.
[37]Karpinski A, Lytle J. (2005). Measuring implicit gender attitudes, gender identity, and self-esteem using the Single Category Implicit Association Test. Unpublished manuscript.
[38]Kosfeld, M; Heinrichs, M; Zak, PJ; Fischbacher, U; Fehr, E. (2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature,435,673-676.
[39]Kawakami K., Dovidio J F., Mol J., Hermsen S., Russia A. (2000). Just say no (to stererotyping):Effects of training on the negation of stererotypic associations on stererotype activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78,871-888.
[40]Lewis, J. D. & A.Weigert. (1985). Trust as a Social Reality, SocialForces,63(4), 967-985.
[41]LEWICKI R J, BUNKER B. (1995). Trust in relationships:a model of development and decline. [M]//BUNKER B B, RUBIN J Z.Conflict, cooperation, and justice.San Francisco:Jossey Bass.
[42]Lewicki, Roy J. Tomlinson, Edward C. Gillespie, Nicole. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust development:theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions.Journal of Management,32(6),991-1022.
[43]Lewicki Roy J., Sankalp Chaturvedi. (2006).Trust in developing relationships:from theroy tomeasurment Academy of Management Best Confer-ence Paper 2006 CM: G1.
[44]Levey A. B., Martin I. (1975). Classical conditioning of human evaluative responses. Behavior Research and Therapy,13,221-226.
[45]Mayer, R.C., J. H. Davis & F. D. Schoorman. (1995). An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust, Academy ofManagementReview,20(3),709-734.
[46]Mcallister, D. J. (1995). Affect and Cognition-based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations, Academy of ManagementJournal,38 (1),24-59.
[47]Mishra, A. K. (1987). Organizational Responses to Crisis:The Centrality of Trust, in Kramer, R.M. & T.R.
[48]Nicolas Koranyi. Klaus Rothermund. (2012). Automatic coping mechanisms in committed relationships:Increased interpersonal trust as a response to stress. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.48(1),180-185.
[49]Nosek B A, Banaji M R. (2001). The Go/No-go Association Task. Social Cognition,19(6),625-666.
[50]PATRICIA M D, JOSEPH P C, MICHAEL R M. (1998). Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust. The Academy of Management Review,23(3),601-620.
[51]Penke L, Eichstaedt J, Asendorpf J B. (2006). Single-Attribute Implicit Association Tests(SA-IAT)for the assessment of unipolar constructs:the case of sociosexuality. Experimental Psychology,53(4),283-291.
[52]Pekka Kiviranta,Helsinki,Finland. (2003). Disbelief and Trust in Psychoanalysis-A Case Study.Int Forum Psyehoanal,12(1),53-60.
[53]Peter A. Bos, Erno J. Hermans, Nick F. Ramsey, Jack van Honk. (2012). The neural mechanisms by which testosterone acts on interpersonal trust. Neurolmage,61(3), 730-737.
[54]Randy Borum. (2010). The Science of Interpersonal Trust. McLean, VA:The Mlitre Corporation.
[55]Righetti, Francesca; Finkenauer, Catrin. (2011). If you are able to control yourself, I will trust you:The role of perceived self-control in interpersonal trust.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,100(5),874-886.
[56]Roger C. Mayer, Philip Bobko, James H. Davis, Mark B. Gavin.(2011). The effects of changing power and influence tactics on trust in the supervisor:A longitudinal field study. Journal of Trust Research 1(2),177-201
[57]Rotter, J. B. (1967). "A New Scale for the Measurement of Interpersonal Trust", Journal of Personality,35(4),651-665.
[58]Rotter, J. B. (1971).Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust. American Psychologist,26(6),444-452.
[59]Rotenberg, Ken J. (1994). Loneliness and inter-personal trust.Journal of Social &Clinical Psychology,13(2),152-173.
[60]Rotenberg, K.J., Boulton, M.J., & Fox, C. (2005). Cross-sectional and longitudinal relations among trust beliefs, psychological maladjustment, and social relationships, during childhood:Are very highas well as very low trusting children at risk? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,33,595-610Sabe,1 C.F.,1993, "Studied Trust: Building New Forms of Cooperation in Volatile Economy", Human Relations,46(9), pp.1130-1170.
[61]Simpson, Jeffry A. Kruglanski, Arie W.; Higgins, E. Tory. (2007). Foundations of interpersonal trust. Social psychology:Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed.). New York, NY, US:Guilford Press, pp.587-607.
[62]Shapiro, D., B. H. Sheppard& L.Cheraskin. (2007). Business on a Handshake, Negotiation Journal,8(4),365-377.
[63]Stuart E. W., Shimp T. A, Engle R.W. (1987). Classical conditioning of consumer attitudes:experiments in an advertising context. Journal of Consumer Research,14, 334-349.
[64]Tayler, T. R. & P.Degoey. (1995). Collective Restraint in Social Dilemmas: Procedural Justice and Social Identifi-cation Effects on Support for Authorities, Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology,69(3),482-497.
[65]Thomas Baumgartner, Markus Heinrichs, Aline Vonlanthen, Urs Fischbacher, Ernst Fehr. (2008). Oxytocin Shapes the Neural Circuitry of Trust and Trust Adaptation in Humans.Neuron,58(4),639-650.
[66]Timothy R. Koscik, Daniel Tranel. (2011). The human amygdala is necessary for developing and expressing normal interpersonal trust. Neuropsychologia,49(4), 602-611.
[67]Warren, M. E. (1999). Democracy and Trust, NewYork:Cambridge University Press.
[68]William Fleeson, Christine Leieht. (2006). On delineating and integrating the study of variability and stability in Personality Psychology:Interpersonal trust as illustration. Journal of Research in Personality.40(1),5-20.
[69]Won-Woo Park, Sangyun Kim. (2012). The Need of Leader-Subordinate Reciprocal Dyadic Trust to Build the Subordinate's Trust in the Organization:The Case of Korean Air Pilots. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 22(2),97-119.
[70]Wrightsman, L. S. (1974). Assumptions about Human Nature:A Social-psychological Analysis, Monterey, CA:Brooks/Cole.
[71]WRIGHTSMAN L S.Interpersonal trust and attitudes toward human nature[M] //ROBINSON J P, SHAVER P R., WRIGHTSMAN L S. (1991). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes:measures of social psychological attitudes.San Diego, CA:Academic Press,373-412.
[72]Young, L. C. & I. F.Wilkinson. (1989). The Role of Trust and Co-operation in Marketing Channels:A Preliminary Study, European Journal of Marketing,23(2), 109-122.
[73]Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of Trust:Institutional Sources of Economic Structure:1840-1920, Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.
[1]常光伟,王青春,阴国恩.(2011).决策偏好研究述评.心理研究,4(6)：10-14.
[2]陈介玄,高承恕.(1991).台湾企业运作的社会秩序：人情关系与法律.东海学报,32(10),219-232.
[3]崔丽娟,胡海龙,吴明证,解春玲.(2006).网络游戏成瘾者的内隐攻击性研究.心理科学,29(3),570-573.
[4]崔丽娟,张高产.(2004).内隐联结测验(IAT)研究回顾与展望.心理科学,27(1),161-164.
[5]戴春林,杨治良,吴明证.(2005).内隐攻击性的实验研究.心理科学,28(1),96-98.
[6]高旭辰.(2004).内隐联想测验影响因素研究.硕士论文.上海：华东师范大学心理学系.
[7]古婷.(2011).大学生人际信任相关因素的调查与实验研究.山东师范大学,硕士论文.
[8]韩振华.(2010).人际信任的影响因素及其机制研究.南开大学,博士学位论文.
[9]郝江丽.(2012).大学生人际信任预期对信任行为的影响研究.中国地质大学,硕士论文.
[10]侯珂,邹泓,张秋凌.(2004).内隐联想测验：信度、效度及原理.心理科学进展,12(2),223-230.
[11]黄建贵.(2008).社会判断中的连续性决策过程.西北师范大学,硕士学位论文.
[12]何晓丽,王振宏,王克静.(2011).积极情绪对人际信任影响的线索效应.心理学报,43,1408-1417.
[13]何晓丽.(2013).积极情绪对人际信任与人际互动影响的线索效应.陕西师范大学,博士学位论文.
[14]李芬,风笑天.(2003).大学生人际信任危机的社会心理学分析.北京教育,5,20-22.
[15]李锦萍,张卫.(2007).攻击性内隐社会认知的研究综述.社会心理科学,22(5-6),175-179.
[16]李闻戈.(2003).女大学生自我接纳和人际关系的相关研究.福建师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(2),125-131.
[17]李闻戈.(2005).工读学生与普通学生攻击性行为外显和内隐社会认知特点的比较研究.福建师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(2),141-145,147.
[18]李达.(2011).信任与组织发展.武汉大学,博士学位论文,14.
[19]梁宁建,吴明证,高旭成.(2003).基于反应时范式的内隐社会认知研究方法.心理科学,26(2),208-211.
[20]刘麟书.(2001).人际信任整合模型之研究,台湾铭传大学,硕士论文.
[21]刘金平.(2003).大学生心理控制源与人际信任的相关研究.河南大学学报,33(1),18-20.
[22]刘洋.(2010).大学生内隐负面评价恐惧及其干预.西南大学,硕士论文.
[23]刘建华.(2006).提高人际信任水平构建大学生和谐人际关系.贵州工业大学学报(社会科学版),5,85-89.
[24]柳毅.(2008).他人印象形成启动效应的实验研究.苏州大学,硕士论文.
[25]卢光莉,李超然.(2004).大学生人际信任状况的研究.新乡师范高等专科学校学报,(2),7.
[26]焦武萍.(2006).组织管理中的人际信任问题.陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),35,87-88
[27]康园园.(2008).内隐攻击性的研究综述.江苏教育学院学报(社会科学版),24(1),46-48,50.
[28]庞彤彤,宋凤玲.(2006).大学生人际信任度研究.社会心理科学,21(1),63.
[29]彭泗清.(1999).信任的建立机制：关系运作与法律手段.社会学研究,2,53-66.
[30]宋时全.(2005).转型期我国社会信任的表现及其重建途径.北京工业大学学报(社会科学版),5(3),70-74.
[31]陶芝兰,王欢.(2006).信任模式的历史变迁—从人际信任到制度信任.北京邮电大学(社会科学版).8(2)：20-23.
[32]涂海燕,邓维,胡静.(2008).硕士研究生人际信任度现状研究.社会心理科学,23(3-4),289.
[33]王韧.(2011).他人印象形成启动效应的实验研究.浙江师范大学,硕士学位论文.
[34]王霞霞.(2008).大学生人际信任的特征研究.西南大学,硕士学位论文.
[35]韦慧民,龙立荣(2008).组织中人际初始信任研究述评.心理科学进展,16,(2),328-334.
[36]魏晓娅.(2002).中学生人际信任的初步研究.西南师范大学,硕士学位论文.
[37]温芳芳,佐斌.(2007).评价单一态度对象的内隐社会认知测验方法.心理科学进展,15(5),828-833.
[38]辛自强,周正(2012).大学生人际信任变迁的横断历史研究.心理科学进展,20(3),344-353.
[39]杨治良,高桦,郭力平.(1998).社会认知具有更强的内隐性——兼论内隐和外显的“钢筋水泥”关系.心理学报,30(1),1-5.
[40]杨治良,刘素珍,高桦.(1996).内隐与外显社会认知(攻击性)的性别差异之实验研究.湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(3),80-83.
[41]杨晓莉,李一茗,邹泓.(2008).儿童、青少年人际信任的研究述评.宁波大学学报(教育科学版),30(5),47-52.
[42]杨治良,刘素珍,钟毅平,高桦,庸永明.(1997).内隐社会认知的初步实验研究.心理学报,29(1),17-21.
[43]杨中芳.(2001).中国人的人际关系、情感与信任.台湾：远流出版公司.
[44]杨中芳.(1991).试论中国人的“自己”：理论与研究方向,杨中芳、高尚仁主编：中国人·中国心——人格与社会篇,台北：远流出版公司.
[45]杨中芳,彭泗清.(1999).中国人人际信任的概念化：一个人际关系的观点.社会学参考文献研究,80(2),1-21.
[46]叶茂林.(2001).材料性质与内隐攻击性启动效应的实验研究.心理科学,24(4),418-421,509.
[47]张东宁,王有智.(2005).IAT测验对攻击性内隐社会认知的应用研究.心理学探新,25(4),74-77.
[48]张东宁.(2004).攻击性的内隐社会认知实验研究一IAT测验在攻击性研究中的应用.硕士论文,西安：陕西师范大学.
[49]张建齐(2012).90后大学生人际信任、自立人格与人际关系的相关研究.福建师范大学,硕士论文.
[50]张建新,张妙清,梁觉.(2000).殊化信任与泛化信任在人际信任行为路径模型中的作用.心理学报,32(3),311-316.
[51]张建新,彭迈克.(1993).指向具体人物对象的人际信任：跨文化比较及认知模型.心理学报,25(2),164-172.
[52]张珂.(2010).大学生人际亲疏与内隐攻击性关系的实验研究.西南大学,硕士论文.
[53]张镇,李幼穗.(2005).内隐与外显自尊情境启动效应的研究.中国临床心理学杂志,13(3)：318-320.
[54]赵竞,孙晓军,周宗奎,魏华,牛更枫(2013).网络交往中的人际信任.心理科学进展,21(8),1493-1501.
[55]郑信军.(1997).青少年的人际信任的调查研究.温州师范学院学报(哲学社会 科学版),(4),62-66.
[56]郑信军.(1998).大学生的人际信任与人格特征的相关研究.宁波大学学报(教育科学版),(2),16-19.
[57]郑也夫.(1999).信任：溯源与定义,北京社会科学,4,118-123.
[58]《中华成语词典》编委会.(2007).《中华成语词典》.北京：中国大百科全书出版社.
[59]钟毅平,杨治良.(1998).内隐社会认知：印象形成的启动效应研究.心理学报,30(1)：21-26.
[60]徐德淼,唐日新,解军.(2007).外显和内隐攻击性表现方式的性别差异实验研究.心理科学,30(6),1342-1344.
[61]徐德淼.(2007).大学生内隐攻击性表现方式的性别差异实验研究.硕士论文.南昌：江西师范大学教育学院.
[62]薛天山,翟学伟.(2009).西方人际信任研究的路径与困境.南京大学学报(哲学·人文科学·社会科学),(2),127-134,144.
[63]周爱保.(1998).过去经验对内隐社会知觉的影响.心理学报,30(2),149-153.
[64]周爱保.(1999).内隐社会认知的理论建构.西北师大学报(社会科学版),36(6),28-32.
[65]朱婵媚,宫火良,郑希付.(2006).未成年人内隐攻击性特征的实验研究.心理学探新,26(2),48-50.
[66]朱虹.(2011).“亲而信”到“利相关”:人际信任的转向——一项关于人际信任状况的实证研究.学海,4：115-121.
[67]朱虹,马丽.(2011).人际信任发生机制探索——相识关系的引入.江海学刊,4：123-128.
[68]赵文龙,王夏峥.(2012).当代大学生信任问题研究——基于某高校的调查.西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),32(5),120-128.
[2]Anthony M. Evans. William Revelle. (2008). Survey and behavioral measurements of interpersonal trust. Journal of Research in Personality,42(6),1585-1593.
[3]Bradach, J. L. & R.G.Eccles. (1989). Price, Authority and Trust:From Ideal Types to Plural Forms, Annual Review of Sociology,15(1),97-118.
[4]Barber B. (1983).The logic and limits of trust. New Brunswick, NJ:Rutgers University Press.
[5]Bargh J A, Pietromonaco P. (1982). Automatic information processing and social perception:the influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3),437-449.
[6]C. Ashley Fulmer, Michele J. Gelfand. (2012). At What Level (and in Whom) We Trust Trust Across Multiple Organizational Levels. Journal of Management,38(4), 1167-1230.
[7]C. Eisenegger, M. Naef, R. Snozzi, M. Heinrichs& E. Fehr. (2010). Prejudice and truth about the effect of testosterone on human bargaining behaviour. Nature,463, 356-359.
[8]Carla Sacchi (2004).Interpersonal trust in different ages.Inter disciplinaria, Numero Especial,21(99),87-107.
[9]Christian Lukas, Jens Robert Schondube. (2012).Trust and adaptive learning in implicit contracts. Review of Managerial Science,6(1),1-32.
[10]Colquitt, Jason A.; Scott, Brent A.; LePine, Jeffery. (2007). A Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity:A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,92 (4),909-927.
[11]Dag Wollebaek, Susanne Wallman Lundasen, Lars Tragardh. (2012). Three Forms of Interpersonal Trust:Evidence from Swedish Municipalities. Scandinavian Political Studies,35 (4),319-346.
[12]Das, T. K. & B.Teng. (1998). "Between Trust and Control Developing Confidence in Partner Cooperation in Alliances", Academy ofManagementReview,23(3), 491-512.
[13]Das T.K., Bing-Sheng Teng (2004).Therisk-based view of trust:a conceptual framework. Journal of Businessand Psychology,19(1),85-116.
[14]Dasgupta N, McGhee D E, Greenwald A. G & Banaji M R. (2000). Automatic Preference for White Americans:Eliminating the Familiarity Explanation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,36(3),316-328.
[15]De Houwer J. (2003). The Extrinsic Affective Simon Task. Experimental Psychology,50(2),77-85.
[16]De Houwer J. (2002). The implicit association test as a tool for studying dysfunctional associations in psychopathology:strengths and limitations. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry,33 (2),115-133.
[17]Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution,1(2), 265-279.
[18]Dirks, Kurt T., Ferrin, Donald L.(2002). Trust in leadership:Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology,87(4), 611-628.
[19]Donald L.Ferin, Kurt T. Dirks (2006).Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationship on interpersonal trust.Journal of Applied Psycholohy,91(4),870-883.
[20]Dunn, J. R. & Schwertzer, M. E. (2005). Feeling and beliving:the influence of emotion on trust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,88,736-748.
[21]Dasgupta N., Greenwald A. G (2001). On the male ability and disliked individual. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,81,800-814.
[22]Fazio R H, Olson M A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research:their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology,54(1),297-327.
[23]Ferrin, Donald L.Dirks, Kurt T.Shah, Pri P. (2006). Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4),870-883.
[24]Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives:Positive emotions, induced through meditation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,95, 1045-1062.
[25]Good, D. (1988). Individuals, Interpersonal Relations and Trust, in Gambetta D. (ed.), Trust:Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, NewYork:Basil Blackwel,1,31-48.
[26]Granovetier M. (1985). Economic action and social structure:the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,91(3),481-510.
[27]Greenwald A G, Banaji M R. (1995). Implicit Social Cognition:Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review,102(1),4-27.
[28]Greenwald A G, Farnham S D. (2000). Using the Implicit Association Test to Measure Self-Esteem and Self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,79 (6),1022-1038.
[29]Greenwald A G, McGhee D E, Schwartz J L K. (1998). Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition:The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74(6),1464-1480.
[30]Greenwald A G, Nosek B A, Banaji M R. (2003). Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test:An Improved Scoring Algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(2),197-216.
[31]HARDIN R. Trust and trustworthiness. New York:Russell Sage Foundation,2002.
[32]Hosmer, L. T.,1995, "Trust:The Connection Link between Organizational Theory and Philosophical Eth-ics", Academy ofManagementReview,20(2),379-403.
[33]Harker, L., & Keltner, D. (2001). Expressions of positive emotions in women's college yearbook pictures and their relationship to personality and life outcomes across adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,80,112-114.
[34]Johnson-George, C. & W. C. Swap. (1982). Measurement of Specific Interpersonal Trust:Construction and Validation of a Scale to Assess Trust in a Specific Other.Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology,43(6),1306-1317.
[35]John K.Rempel, John GHolmes, Mark P.Zanna. (1985). Trust in close relationships. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology,49(1),95-112.
[36]Karpinshi A, Steinman R B. (2006). The Single Category Implicit Association Test: as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,91(1),16-32.
[37]Karpinski A, Lytle J. (2005). Measuring implicit gender attitudes, gender identity, and self-esteem using the Single Category Implicit Association Test. Unpublished manuscript.
[38]Kosfeld, M; Heinrichs, M; Zak, PJ; Fischbacher, U; Fehr, E. (2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature,435,673-676.
[39]Kawakami K., Dovidio J F., Mol J., Hermsen S., Russia A. (2000). Just say no (to stererotyping):Effects of training on the negation of stererotypic associations on stererotype activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78,871-888.
[40]Lewis, J. D. & A.Weigert. (1985). Trust as a Social Reality, SocialForces,63(4), 967-985.
[41]LEWICKI R J, BUNKER B. (1995). Trust in relationships:a model of development and decline. [M]//BUNKER B B, RUBIN J Z.Conflict, cooperation, and justice.San Francisco:Jossey Bass.
[42]Lewicki, Roy J. Tomlinson, Edward C. Gillespie, Nicole. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust development:theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions.Journal of Management,32(6),991-1022.
[43]Lewicki Roy J., Sankalp Chaturvedi. (2006).Trust in developing relationships:from theroy tomeasurment Academy of Management Best Confer-ence Paper 2006 CM: G1.
[44]Levey A. B., Martin I. (1975). Classical conditioning of human evaluative responses. Behavior Research and Therapy,13,221-226.
[45]Mayer, R.C., J. H. Davis & F. D. Schoorman. (1995). An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust, Academy ofManagementReview,20(3),709-734.
[46]Mcallister, D. J. (1995). Affect and Cognition-based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations, Academy of ManagementJournal,38 (1),24-59.
[47]Mishra, A. K. (1987). Organizational Responses to Crisis:The Centrality of Trust, in Kramer, R.M. & T.R.
[48]Nicolas Koranyi. Klaus Rothermund. (2012). Automatic coping mechanisms in committed relationships:Increased interpersonal trust as a response to stress. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.48(1),180-185.
[49]Nosek B A, Banaji M R. (2001). The Go/No-go Association Task. Social Cognition,19(6),625-666.
[50]PATRICIA M D, JOSEPH P C, MICHAEL R M. (1998). Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust. The Academy of Management Review,23(3),601-620.
[51]Penke L, Eichstaedt J, Asendorpf J B. (2006). Single-Attribute Implicit Association Tests(SA-IAT)for the assessment of unipolar constructs:the case of sociosexuality. Experimental Psychology,53(4),283-291.
[52]Pekka Kiviranta,Helsinki,Finland. (2003). Disbelief and Trust in Psychoanalysis-A Case Study.Int Forum Psyehoanal,12(1),53-60.
[53]Peter A. Bos, Erno J. Hermans, Nick F. Ramsey, Jack van Honk. (2012). The neural mechanisms by which testosterone acts on interpersonal trust. Neurolmage,61(3), 730-737.
[54]Randy Borum. (2010). The Science of Interpersonal Trust. McLean, VA:The Mlitre Corporation.
[55]Righetti, Francesca; Finkenauer, Catrin. (2011). If you are able to control yourself, I will trust you:The role of perceived self-control in interpersonal trust.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,100(5),874-886.
[56]Roger C. Mayer, Philip Bobko, James H. Davis, Mark B. Gavin.(2011). The effects of changing power and influence tactics on trust in the supervisor:A longitudinal field study. Journal of Trust Research 1(2),177-201
[57]Rotter, J. B. (1967). "A New Scale for the Measurement of Interpersonal Trust", Journal of Personality,35(4),651-665.
[58]Rotter, J. B. (1971).Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust. American Psychologist,26(6),444-452.
[59]Rotenberg, Ken J. (1994). Loneliness and inter-personal trust.Journal of Social &Clinical Psychology,13(2),152-173.
[60]Rotenberg, K.J., Boulton, M.J., & Fox, C. (2005). Cross-sectional and longitudinal relations among trust beliefs, psychological maladjustment, and social relationships, during childhood:Are very highas well as very low trusting children at risk? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,33,595-610Sabe,1 C.F.,1993, "Studied Trust: Building New Forms of Cooperation in Volatile Economy", Human Relations,46(9), pp.1130-1170.
[61]Simpson, Jeffry A. Kruglanski, Arie W.; Higgins, E. Tory. (2007). Foundations of interpersonal trust. Social psychology:Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed.). New York, NY, US:Guilford Press, pp.587-607.
[62]Shapiro, D., B. H. Sheppard& L.Cheraskin. (2007). Business on a Handshake, Negotiation Journal,8(4),365-377.
[63]Stuart E. W., Shimp T. A, Engle R.W. (1987). Classical conditioning of consumer attitudes:experiments in an advertising context. Journal of Consumer Research,14, 334-349.
[64]Tayler, T. R. & P.Degoey. (1995). Collective Restraint in Social Dilemmas: Procedural Justice and Social Identifi-cation Effects on Support for Authorities, Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology,69(3),482-497.
[65]Thomas Baumgartner, Markus Heinrichs, Aline Vonlanthen, Urs Fischbacher, Ernst Fehr. (2008). Oxytocin Shapes the Neural Circuitry of Trust and Trust Adaptation in Humans.Neuron,58(4),639-650.
[66]Timothy R. Koscik, Daniel Tranel. (2011). The human amygdala is necessary for developing and expressing normal interpersonal trust. Neuropsychologia,49(4), 602-611.
[67]Warren, M. E. (1999). Democracy and Trust, NewYork:Cambridge University Press.
[68]William Fleeson, Christine Leieht. (2006). On delineating and integrating the study of variability and stability in Personality Psychology:Interpersonal trust as illustration. Journal of Research in Personality.40(1),5-20.
[69]Won-Woo Park, Sangyun Kim. (2012). The Need of Leader-Subordinate Reciprocal Dyadic Trust to Build the Subordinate's Trust in the Organization:The Case of Korean Air Pilots. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 22(2),97-119.
[70]Wrightsman, L. S. (1974). Assumptions about Human Nature:A Social-psychological Analysis, Monterey, CA:Brooks/Cole.
[71]WRIGHTSMAN L S.Interpersonal trust and attitudes toward human nature[M] //ROBINSON J P, SHAVER P R., WRIGHTSMAN L S. (1991). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes:measures of social psychological attitudes.San Diego, CA:Academic Press,373-412.
[72]Young, L. C. & I. F.Wilkinson. (1989). The Role of Trust and Co-operation in Marketing Channels:A Preliminary Study, European Journal of Marketing,23(2), 109-122.
[73]Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of Trust:Institutional Sources of Economic Structure:1840-1920, Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.
[1]常光伟,王青春,阴国恩.(2011).决策偏好研究述评.心理研究,4(6)：10-14.
[2]陈介玄,高承恕.(1991).台湾企业运作的社会秩序：人情关系与法律.东海学报,32(10),219-232.
[3]崔丽娟,胡海龙,吴明证,解春玲.(2006).网络游戏成瘾者的内隐攻击性研究.心理科学,29(3),570-573.
[4]崔丽娟,张高产.(2004).内隐联结测验(IAT)研究回顾与展望.心理科学,27(1),161-164.
[5]戴春林,杨治良,吴明证.(2005).内隐攻击性的实验研究.心理科学,28(1),96-98.
[6]高旭辰.(2004).内隐联想测验影响因素研究.硕士论文.上海：华东师范大学心理学系.
[7]古婷.(2011).大学生人际信任相关因素的调查与实验研究.山东师范大学,硕士论文.
[8]韩振华.(2010).人际信任的影响因素及其机制研究.南开大学,博士学位论文.
[9]郝江丽.(2012).大学生人际信任预期对信任行为的影响研究.中国地质大学,硕士论文.
[10]侯珂,邹泓,张秋凌.(2004).内隐联想测验：信度、效度及原理.心理科学进展,12(2),223-230.
[11]黄建贵.(2008).社会判断中的连续性决策过程.西北师范大学,硕士学位论文.
[12]何晓丽,王振宏,王克静.(2011).积极情绪对人际信任影响的线索效应.心理学报,43,1408-1417.
[13]何晓丽.(2013).积极情绪对人际信任与人际互动影响的线索效应.陕西师范大学,博士学位论文.
[14]李芬,风笑天.(2003).大学生人际信任危机的社会心理学分析.北京教育,5,20-22.
[15]李锦萍,张卫.(2007).攻击性内隐社会认知的研究综述.社会心理科学,22(5-6),175-179.
[16]李闻戈.(2003).女大学生自我接纳和人际关系的相关研究.福建师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(2),125-131.
[17]李闻戈.(2005).工读学生与普通学生攻击性行为外显和内隐社会认知特点的比较研究.福建师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(2),141-145,147.
[18]李达.(2011).信任与组织发展.武汉大学,博士学位论文,14.
[19]梁宁建,吴明证,高旭成.(2003).基于反应时范式的内隐社会认知研究方法.心理科学,26(2),208-211.
[20]刘麟书.(2001).人际信任整合模型之研究,台湾铭传大学,硕士论文.
[21]刘金平.(2003).大学生心理控制源与人际信任的相关研究.河南大学学报,33(1),18-20.
[22]刘洋.(2010).大学生内隐负面评价恐惧及其干预.西南大学,硕士论文.
[23]刘建华.(2006).提高人际信任水平构建大学生和谐人际关系.贵州工业大学学报(社会科学版),5,85-89.
[24]柳毅.(2008).他人印象形成启动效应的实验研究.苏州大学,硕士论文.
[25]卢光莉,李超然.(2004).大学生人际信任状况的研究.新乡师范高等专科学校学报,(2),7.
[26]焦武萍.(2006).组织管理中的人际信任问题.陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),35,87-88
[27]康园园.(2008).内隐攻击性的研究综述.江苏教育学院学报(社会科学版),24(1),46-48,50.
[28]庞彤彤,宋凤玲.(2006).大学生人际信任度研究.社会心理科学,21(1),63.
[29]彭泗清.(1999).信任的建立机制：关系运作与法律手段.社会学研究,2,53-66.
[30]宋时全.(2005).转型期我国社会信任的表现及其重建途径.北京工业大学学报(社会科学版),5(3),70-74.
[31]陶芝兰,王欢.(2006).信任模式的历史变迁—从人际信任到制度信任.北京邮电大学(社会科学版).8(2)：20-23.
[32]涂海燕,邓维,胡静.(2008).硕士研究生人际信任度现状研究.社会心理科学,23(3-4),289.
[33]王韧.(2011).他人印象形成启动效应的实验研究.浙江师范大学,硕士学位论文.
[34]王霞霞.(2008).大学生人际信任的特征研究.西南大学,硕士学位论文.
[35]韦慧民,龙立荣(2008).组织中人际初始信任研究述评.心理科学进展,16,(2),328-334.
[36]魏晓娅.(2002).中学生人际信任的初步研究.西南师范大学,硕士学位论文.
[37]温芳芳,佐斌.(2007).评价单一态度对象的内隐社会认知测验方法.心理科学进展,15(5),828-833.
[38]辛自强,周正(2012).大学生人际信任变迁的横断历史研究.心理科学进展,20(3),344-353.
[39]杨治良,高桦,郭力平.(1998).社会认知具有更强的内隐性——兼论内隐和外显的“钢筋水泥”关系.心理学报,30(1),1-5.
[40]杨治良,刘素珍,高桦.(1996).内隐与外显社会认知(攻击性)的性别差异之实验研究.湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(3),80-83.
[41]杨晓莉,李一茗,邹泓.(2008).儿童、青少年人际信任的研究述评.宁波大学学报(教育科学版),30(5),47-52.
[42]杨治良,刘素珍,钟毅平,高桦,庸永明.(1997).内隐社会认知的初步实验研究.心理学报,29(1),17-21.
[43]杨中芳.(2001).中国人的人际关系、情感与信任.台湾：远流出版公司.
[44]杨中芳.(1991).试论中国人的“自己”：理论与研究方向,杨中芳、高尚仁主编：中国人·中国心——人格与社会篇,台北：远流出版公司.
[45]杨中芳,彭泗清.(1999).中国人人际信任的概念化：一个人际关系的观点.社会学参考文献研究,80(2),1-21.
[46]叶茂林.(2001).材料性质与内隐攻击性启动效应的实验研究.心理科学,24(4),418-421,509.
[47]张东宁,王有智.(2005).IAT测验对攻击性内隐社会认知的应用研究.心理学探新,25(4),74-77.
[48]张东宁.(2004).攻击性的内隐社会认知实验研究一IAT测验在攻击性研究中的应用.硕士论文,西安：陕西师范大学.
[49]张建齐(2012).90后大学生人际信任、自立人格与人际关系的相关研究.福建师范大学,硕士论文.
[50]张建新,张妙清,梁觉.(2000).殊化信任与泛化信任在人际信任行为路径模型中的作用.心理学报,32(3),311-316.
[51]张建新,彭迈克.(1993).指向具体人物对象的人际信任：跨文化比较及认知模型.心理学报,25(2),164-172.
[52]张珂.(2010).大学生人际亲疏与内隐攻击性关系的实验研究.西南大学,硕士论文.
[53]张镇,李幼穗.(2005).内隐与外显自尊情境启动效应的研究.中国临床心理学杂志,13(3)：318-320.
[54]赵竞,孙晓军,周宗奎,魏华,牛更枫(2013).网络交往中的人际信任.心理科学进展,21(8),1493-1501.
[55]郑信军.(1997).青少年的人际信任的调查研究.温州师范学院学报(哲学社会 科学版),(4),62-66.
[56]郑信军.(1998).大学生的人际信任与人格特征的相关研究.宁波大学学报(教育科学版),(2),16-19.
[57]郑也夫.(1999).信任：溯源与定义,北京社会科学,4,118-123.
[58]《中华成语词典》编委会.(2007).《中华成语词典》.北京：中国大百科全书出版社.
[59]钟毅平,杨治良.(1998).内隐社会认知：印象形成的启动效应研究.心理学报,30(1)：21-26.
[60]徐德淼,唐日新,解军.(2007).外显和内隐攻击性表现方式的性别差异实验研究.心理科学,30(6),1342-1344.
[61]徐德淼.(2007).大学生内隐攻击性表现方式的性别差异实验研究.硕士论文.南昌：江西师范大学教育学院.
[62]薛天山,翟学伟.(2009).西方人际信任研究的路径与困境.南京大学学报(哲学·人文科学·社会科学),(2),127-134,144.
[63]周爱保.(1998).过去经验对内隐社会知觉的影响.心理学报,30(2),149-153.
[64]周爱保.(1999).内隐社会认知的理论建构.西北师大学报(社会科学版),36(6),28-32.
[65]朱婵媚,宫火良,郑希付.(2006).未成年人内隐攻击性特征的实验研究.心理学探新,26(2),48-50.
[66]朱虹.(2011).“亲而信”到“利相关”:人际信任的转向——一项关于人际信任状况的实证研究.学海,4：115-121.
[67]朱虹,马丽.(2011).人际信任发生机制探索——相识关系的引入.江海学刊,4：123-128.
[68]赵文龙,王夏峥.(2012).当代大学生信任问题研究——基于某高校的调查.西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),32(5),120-128.