How organizational motives and communications affect public trust in organizations: The case of carbon dioxide capture and storage

Abstract Preventing climate change is among the greatest environmental challenges facing the world today. Recently developed carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technology is an important strategy to mitigate climate change. Public trust in organizations involved in CCS technology is important for successful implementation of this technology. This work adresses how inferred organizational motives and organizational communications affect public trust in these organizations. Study 1 ( N  = 264) showed that Dutch citizens generally have less trust in the industrial organizations than in the environmental NGOs involved in CCS. As predicted, inferred organizational motives (organization-serving motives versus public-serving motives) accounted for this difference. In Study 2 ( N  = 78) and Study 3 ( N  = 51) we used experimental designs. Both experiments showed that organizations that communicated arguments incongruent with inferred organizational motives instigated less trust than organizations that communicated arguments congruent with inferred organizational motives. Study 3 additionally showed that communicating an incongruent and a congruent argument together diminished the negative effects of the incongruent argument. In both Study 2 and Study 3 the effect of congruency on trust was mediated by perceived honesty of the organizations.

[1]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  The Brent Spar Controversy: An Example of Risk Communication Gone Wrong , 1997 .

[2]  J. Palutikof,et al.  Climate change 2007 : impacts, adaptation and vulnerability , 2001 .

[3]  J. P. Wanous,et al.  Overall job satisfaction: how good are single-item measures? , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

[4]  M. Siegrist.  The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[5]  M.H.P. Kleijnen,et al.  Customer adoption of e‐service: an experimental study , 2001 .

[6]  Tommy Gärling,et al.  Cognitive and affective risk judgements related to climate change , 2007 .

[7]  Bart W. Terwel,et al.  Voice in political decision-making: the effect of group voice on perceived trustworthiness of decision makers and subsequent acceptance of decisions. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[8]  Chris von Borgstede,et al.  Willingness to accept climate change strategies: The effect of values and norms , 2004 .

[9]  Y. Maeda,et al.  Determinants of Trust in Industry, Government, and Citizen's Groups in Japan , 2003, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[10]  R Shepherd,et al.  What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. , 1996, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[11]  Lois A. Mohr,et al.  Charitable programs and the retailer: do they mix? , 2000 .

[12]  W. Galston.  Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity , 1996 .

[13]  Lois A. Mohr,et al.  Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs , 2006 .

[14]  M. Siegrist,et al.  Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[15]  J. Palutikof,et al.  Climate change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers. , 2007 .

[16]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Consumer trust in an Internet store , 2000, Inf. Technol. Manag..

[18]  M. Forehand,et al.  When Is Honesty The Best Policy? The Effect of Stated Company Intent on Consumer Skepticism , 2002 .

[19]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  A Causal Model Explaining the Perception and Acceptance of Gene Technology1 , 1999 .

[20]  Bart W. Terwel,et al.  Competence‐Based and Integrity‐Based Trust as Predictors of Acceptance of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS) , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[21]  C. Batson.  Do prosocial motives have any business in business , 1996 .

[22]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[23]  N. Schwarz,et al.  The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities on Companies With Bad Reputations , 2006 .

[24]  C. Batson,et al.  Why Act for the Public Good? Four Answers , 1994 .

[25]  Ronald G. Stansfield,et al.  Sociological Methodology 1982 , 1983 .

[26]  F. Selnes.  Antecedents and consequences of trust and satisfaction in buyer‐seller relationships , 1998 .

[27]  S. West,et al.  A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. , 2002, Psychological methods.

[28]  C. Funk,et al.  The Dual Influence of Self-Interest and Societal Interest in Public Opinion , 2000 .

[29]  F. Selnes,et al.  Antecedents and consequences of trust and satisfaction in buyer-seller relationship, European Journal of Marketing, . , 1998 .

[30]  Susan Miles,et al.  Public perception of scientific uncertainty in relation to food hazards , 2003 .