How to use apology and compensation to repair competence-versus integrity-based trust violations in e-commerce

Abstract Drawing on the theory of “attribution and economic man”, this study examines the trust repair implications of using different apology-types and compensation-types simultaneously after different trust violations in e-commerce. Based on a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design involving 440 participants, several key findings were obtained. The results revealed that an apology with internal attribution is more effective in repairing trust than apologies with external attribution for integrity-based trust violations. In contrast, an apology with external attribution is more effective in repairing trust than apologies with internal attribution for competence-based trust violations. Both of these conclusions hold under the condition of equal compensation. The results also revealed that overcompensation repairs trust more effectively than equal compensation only when the mistrusted party apologized with an internal attribution for a competence-based trust violation or the mistrusted party apologized with an external attribution for integrity-based trust violations. This study concludes with implications and suggestions for future research.

[1]  Eric T. Bradlow,et al.  Promises and Lies: Restoring Violated Trust , 2004 .

[2]  D. Cremer,et al.  What money can’t buy: The psychology of financial overcompensation , 2014 .

[3]  Prashant Palvia,et al.  The role of trust in e-commerce relational exchange: A unified model , 2009, Inf. Manag..

[4]  Mary Jo Bitner,et al.  The Service Encounter: Diagnosing Favorable and Unfavorable Incidents: , 1990 .

[5]  D. Cremer,et al.  When being overpaid makes me feel good about myself: It depends on how the other feels , 2009 .

[6]  D. Ferrin,et al.  Removing the shadow of suspicion: the effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  Jagdip Singh,et al.  Consumer Trust, Value, and Loyalty in Relational Exchanges , 2002 .

[8]  Ruth N. Bolton,et al.  A Model of Customer Satisfaction with Service Encounters Involving Failure and Recovery , 1999 .

[9]  Brian R. Dineen,et al.  The Road to Reconciliation: Antecedents of Victim Willingness to Reconcile Following a Broken Promise , 2004 .

[10]  Mary C. Gilly,et al.  Consumer Complaint Handling as a Strategic Marketing Tool , 1985 .

[11]  B. Božić.  Consumer trust repair: A critical literature review , 2017 .

[12]  Hillary Anger Elfenbein,et al.  What Do People Value When They Negotiate? Mapping the Domain of Subjective Value in Negotiation , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[14]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Cheap Talk with Two Audiences , 1989 .

[15]  Peter H. Kim,et al.  Repairing trust with individuals vs. groups , 2013 .

[16]  Jochen Wirtz,et al.  Consumer responses to compensation, speed of recovery and apology after a service failure , 2004 .

[17]  R. Thaler,et al.  Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners , 1995 .

[18]  D. Ferrin,et al.  Silence speaks volumes: the effectiveness of reticence in comparison to apology and denial for responding to integrity- and competence-based trust violations. , 2007, Journal of Applied Psychology.

[19]  David De Cremer,et al.  In Money We Trust? The Use of Financial Compensations to Repair Trust in the Aftermath of Distributive Harm , 2011 .

[20]  D. Cremer,et al.  Money isn’t all that matters: The use of financial compensation and apologies to preserve relationships in the aftermath of distributive harm , 2013 .

[21]  Elizabeth C. Alexander.  Consumer Reactions to Unethical Service Recovery , 2002 .

[22]  Steven E. Daniels,et al.  When Talk Is Not Cheap: Substantive Penance and Expressions of Intent in Rebuilding Cooperation , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[23]  Matthew K. O. Lee,et al.  A Trust Model for Consumer Internet Shopping , 2001, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[24]  Roy J. Lewicki,et al.  What Is the Role of Trust in Organizational Justice , 2005 .

[25]  Congruity of observed social support behaviors and couple relationship quality , 2018 .

[26]  Yohsuke Ohtsubo,et al.  Do sincere apologies need to be costly? Test of a costly signaling model of apology , 2009 .

[27]  L. Kray,et al.  Different wrongs, different remedies? Reactions to organizational remedies after procedural and interactional injustice. , 2006 .

[28]  Yi Xie,et al.  How to repair customer trust after negative publicity: The roles of competence, integrity, benevolence, and forgiveness , 2009 .

[29]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[30]  B. R. Schlenker,et al.  Excuses and Character: Personal and Social Implications of Excuses , 2001 .

[31]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Approaching Equity and Avoiding Inequity in Groups and Organizations , 1982 .

[32]  D. Cremer,et al.  Trust maintenance as a function of construal level and attributions: The case of apologies , 2018 .

[33]  Mary Jo Bitner,et al.  Evaluating service encounters: The effects of physical surroundings and employee responses. , 1990 .

[34]  Ilyoo B. Hong,et al.  The mediating role of consumer trust in an online merchant in predicting purchase intention , 2013, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[35]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust: Past, Present, and Future , 2007 .

[36]  C. Boshoff.  An experimental study of service recovery options , 1997 .

[37]  T. Tyler,et al.  Is Compensation Enough? Relational Concerns in Responding to Unintended Inequity , 2007 .

[38]  M. Brewer,et al.  A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. , 1979 .

[39]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View Of Trust , 1998 .

[40]  Norman L. Chervany,et al.  What Trust Means in E-Commerce Customer Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Conceptual Typology , 2001, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[41]  D. Cremer,et al.  How do leaders promote cooperation? The effects of charisma and procedural fairness. , 2002 .

[42]  R. T. Kellogg,et al.  The Effectiveness of Accounts Following Transgression , 1983 .

[43]  D. Cremer,et al.  Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of leader self-confidence , 2004 .

[44]  G. Reeder,et al.  The attribution of morality. , 1983 .

[45]  P. Desmet,et al.  On the Psychology of Financial Compensations to Restore Fairness Transgressions: When Intentions Determine Value , 2010 .

[46]  E. Goffman.  Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order , 1971 .

[47]  Charles J. Kacmar,et al.  Developing and Validating Trust Measures for e-Commerce: An Integrative Typology , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[48]  Edward C. Tomlinson,et al.  The Role Of Causal Attribution Dimensions In Trust Repair , 2009 .

[49]  D. Ferrin,et al.  When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation , 2006 .

[50]  M. Gelfand,et al.  Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 2010 .

[51]  Louis M. Hsu,et al.  Factors Affecting Perceptions of Political Candidates Accused of Sexual and Financial Misconduct , 1988 .

[52]  Barbara Gray,et al.  Repairing relationship conflict: how Violation types and culture influence The effectiveness of restoration Rituals , 2009 .

[53]  Arthur A. Stukas,et al.  Interpersonal processes: the interplay of cognitive, motivational, and behavioral activities in social interaction. , 1999, Annual review of psychology.

[54]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model , 2003, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[55]  David De Cremer,et al.  To pay or to apologize? On the psychology of dealing with unfair offers in a dictator game , 2010 .

[56]  D. Gefen,et al.  Consumer trust in B2C e-Commerce and the importance of social presence: experiments in e-Products and e-Services , 2004 .