Aratrmann Kstlar

Aratrmada dört temel ksttan söz edilebilir. Bunlardan birincisi aratma modelini test etmek için kullanlan vakalar. Bu vakalar her ne kadar kültürler aras bir emay uyandrmaya çalsa da, vakada yer alan ve olay gerçekçi klmaya çalan dier anlatmlar belirli bir hata pay yaratm olabilir.Ayrca vakadaki olay takiben sorulan tamir davranlarnn tek bir soru ile ölçülmeye çallmas kavram takip etmek ve anlayabilmek için yetersiz kalmtr.

kincisi aratrmada kültürler aras farkndalk ne kadar yüksek olsa da üçüncü bölümde izah edilen örnek vakalarn uygulanmas baz kstlamalarla kar karyadr. Hollanda’daki Türk katlmclar ile Türkçe vaka analizleri üzerinden çalma yaplrken hiçbir dil problemi ile karlalmamtr. Bununla beraber Hollanda’daki Hollandallar ile çalmalar
ngilizce dili üzerinden yaplmtr ve anadilde gerçekletirimemitir. Her ne kadar Hollanda’da
ngilizce bilgi, anlama ve konuma seviyesi yüksek olsa da bu çalmann yapld dilde balayc olmu olabilir.

Üçüncüsü modelin test edilmesi ile ilgili örneklem says baz noktalarda düüktür. Özellikle Türk katlmclarn olduu vakalarn analizleri üçer kii ile yaplmtr. Bir sonraki çalmalarda kii saysnn mutlaka arttrlmas ve belirli bir doyum noktasna ulalmas gerekmektedir.

Dördüncüsü hem güven tanm ortaya konulurken hem de güven süreci ile ilgili model test edilirken veriler birden fazla aratrmac tarafndan yorumlanmaldr. Bu çalmada bütün veri toplama ve analiz süreci aratrmac tarafndan yaplmtr. Ayrca her ne kadar aratrmac analizlerde önceki bilgilerini belirli aamalarda kstlamaya çalsa da yorumlara baz yansmalar olmu olabilir. Bunu engellemek için daha sonraki çalmalarda birden fazla kodlayc kullanlmal ve bu kodlayclarn çkard dizgilerin birbirlerine ve aratrmacnn dizgisine ne kadar benzedii karlatrlmaldr.

SONUÇ

Tezin odak noktas olan güven, bu çalma kapsamnda hem teorik hem de görgül olarak incelenmitir. Bu güveni daha iyi anlama çabas üç bölüme ayrlm ve herbir bölümde güven süreciyle ilgili çalmalar yaplmtr. Birinci bölümde güvenin ne olduu ve benzer kavramlardan fark ortaya konmutur. Bu irdeleme ile güven; “bir taraf
n gösterecei iyi niyete ve/veya olumlu davran
a dayanarak dier bir taraf
n incinebilirlie raz
olmas
d
r” denilebilir. Böylelikle güvenin psikolojik bir durum olduu ve çeitli faktörlerin varl ile (kontrol, risk) güvenme ihtiyacnn daha da ön plana çkt anlalmaktadr. Ayrca güvenin emin olmaktan daha özellikli bir durum olduu ortaya çkmtr. Güvenin benzerlik ile yakndan ilgili olduu ancak birbirine benzemeyen kiilerin veya durumlarn da güven olgusunu tetikleyebilecei görülmütür. Bununla birlikte ibirlii ile güven arasnda davransal açdan pek bir fark olmad, dolaysyla güveni ibirliinden ayran asl noktann kiilerin sahip olduklar “pozitif eilim”le ilgili olduu ortaya çkmtr. Tahmin edilebilirlikle güven arasndaki farklara bakldnda, tahmin edilebilirlik gerçekte kiilerin kendi kararlarna güvenmesi veya kar tarafn hangi hareketi yapacana dair kesinlik duygusu yaamasdr. Ancak bunun güven tanmndaki pozitif inanç ve duygu temalarn yakalamad belirtilmitir. Son olarak da güven ve güvensizliin aslnda tek kutuplu bir düzlemde hareket etmedii ve bir insana hem güvenilip hem de güvenilemeyecei ortaya çkmtr. Dier bir deyi ile güvenin tersinin güvensizlik olmad ortaya konmutur. Uluslararas yazna göre güven tanmlansa da güvenin Türkiye balamnda ne anlama geldii pek irdelenmemitir. Bu çalma kapsamnda yaplan aratrmada güvenin “kiinin kontrolünün olmad

durumlarda güvene lay
k çal
ma arkadalar
n
n kendisine zarar vermeyeceine dair telafi ve transfer edilebilir inanc
” olduu ortaya çkmtr. Bu tanm etik olarak tanmlanan güven tanmndan telafi ve tamir edilebilirlik açsndan farkllamaktadr.

Bu çalma kapsamnda güven süreç açsndan incelenmitir. Güven, güven ihlali ve güven tamiri bir sürecin parçalar olarak düünülmü ve bu çalmann tamam buna göre tasarlanmtr. Süreci daha iyi anlamak için ilk önce güven tanmlanm, sonrasnda güveni etkileyen öncüller belirlenmitir. Özellikle dürüstlük, yardmseverlik, yetkinlik ve uyumun güveni tetikleyen faktörler olduu bulunmutur. Dürüstlük, yardmseverlik ve yetkinlik hem ulusal hem de uluslararas yaznda kabul görmütür. Uyum kavram ise genellikle toplulukçu kültürlerde görülen ve ulusal yaznda da bahsedilen bir kavramdr. Güvenin öncülleri tanmlandktan sonra güven ihlalini etkileyen faktörler irdelenmitir. Güven ihlaline neden olan faktörlerin yine

güven öncüllerini oluturan faktörlerle ayn olduu görülmütür. Bu da güven ihlalinin psikoloji yaznndaki gibi niyetsellik üzerinden olmadn, güvene layklk üzerinden olduunu göstermitir.

Ulusal ve uluslararas yaznda güven sürecinin belirli parçalarnn irdelendii anlalm ancak güven sürecini bir bütün olarak ele alan bir çalmann olmad farkedilmitir. Bu noktadan hareketle bu çalmada güven, güven ihlali ve güven tamiri arasnda belirli ilikiler tasarlanmtr. Buna göre güvenin belirli türleri vardr ve bu türler güven ihlalini ve güven tamirini ekillendirmektedir. Örnein; baz davranlar baz kiilerin güven algsna zarar verirken, ayn davranlar dier kiilerin güven algsna zarar vermeyebilir. Bunun nedeni ilikilerin deiik niteliksel karakterlere sahip olmasdr (örn. hesaba dayal güven veya özdelemeye dayal güven). Böylelikle belirli güven türleri spesifik güven ihlallerini tetiklemekte ve bu güven ihlalleri belirli tamir davranlar ile çözülebilmektedir.

Bu çalmada güven süreci ile ilgili getirilen açklamalar her yerde ayn sonucu vermeyebileceinden modelin teorik altyapsn salamlatrmak adna model kültürler aras perspektiften de ele alnmtr. Bunun için hem Hollandal hem de Türk katlmclarla belirli bir vaka üzerinden inceleme gerçekletirilmitir. Kiilerin yaad güven ihlalinin tamir edilmesinin iki unsura dayal olduu görülmütür. Bunlardan birincisi kar tarafn niyetini anlamak ve ikincisi ise güven ihlaline neden olan sorunu çözmeye çalmak. Bununla birlikte tamir davranlarnn güven çerçevelerine göre ayrmad ve kültürler aras farkllklarn ortaya çkmadndan da bahsedilebilir. Kültürler aras farklln ortaya çkt yer güveni ihlal edilen kiilerin affetme derecesi olmutur. Bu bulguya göre güven çerçevesi ne kadar ilikisel ve duygusal yapya yaknsa güveni ihlal edilenin hatal davran affetme eilimi o kadar fazladr. Bunun nedeninin, kültürler aras teorilerin genellikle birbirinden izole edilmi kültürleri karlatrmasndan ortaya çkm olduu ve kültürlerin birbiriyle olan etkileimini yadsmasndan kaynaklanan altyap eksiklii olduu söylenebilir.

KAYNAKLAR

Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S. ve Chen, Z. X. (2002), Trust as a Mediator of the Relationship Between Organizational Justice and Work Outcomes: Test of a Social Exchange Model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3): 267-285. Auerbach, C. F. ve Silverstein, L. B. (2003). Qualitative Data: An Introduction to

Coding and Analysis. New York: New York University Press.

Baldwin, M. W., Keelan, J. P., Fehr, B., Enns, V. ve Koh- Rangarajoo, E. (1996). Social cognitive conceptualization of attachment styles: Availability and

accessibility effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71: 94-109. Barber, B. (1983). The Logic and Limits of Trust, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers

University Press.

Bazerman, M. H. ve Tenbrunsel, A. (1998). The Role of Social Context on Decision: Integrating Social Cognition and Behavioral Decision Research. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20(1): 87-91.

Bhattacharya, R., Devinney, T. M. ve Pillutla, M. M. (1998). A formal model of trust based on outcomes. Academy of Management Review, 23(3): 459–72.

Bies, R. J. ve Tripp, T. (1996). Beyond trust: "Getting even" and the need for revenge. In R. M. Kramer ve T. R. Tyler, Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 246-260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bigley, G.A. ve Pearce, J. L. (1998). Straining for shared meaning in organization science: Problems of trust and distrust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3): 405–21.

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.

Boon, S.D. ve Holmes, J. G. (1991). The dynamics of interpersonal trust: Resolving uncertainty in the face of risk’, in R.A. Hinde and J. Groebel (eds), Cooperation and Prosocial Behavior, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 190–211. Bottom, W. P., Gibson, K., Daniels, S. ve Murnighan J. K. (2002). When talk is not

cheap: Substantive penance and expressions of intent in rebuilding cooperation. Organization Science, 13: 497–513.

Bradach, J.L. ve Eccles, R. G. (1989). Price, authority, and trust: From ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review of Sociology, 15: 97–118.

Bromiley, P. ve Cummings, L. L. (1996). Transactions costs in organizations with trust. in R. Bies, B. Sheppard and R. Lewicki (eds), Research on Negotiations in Organizations, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 219–47.

Burt, R. S. ve Knez, M. (1996). Trust and third-party gossip. In R. M. Kramer ve T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research: 68-89. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Butler, J. K. ve Cantrell, R. S. (1984). A behavioral decision theory approach to modeling dyadic trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological Reports, 55: 19-28.

Butler, J.K. (1991). Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of a conditions of trust inventory. Journal of Management, 17: 643–63. Cannon, J. P., Doney, P. M. ve Mullen, M. R. (1999). National Culture and the

Development of Trust: the Need for More Data and More Theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(1): 10-11.

Chiaburu, D.S. ve Harrison, D.A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 93, pp. 1082-103.

Chua, R. Y., Ingram, P. ve Morris, M. (2008). From the Head and the Heart:

Locating Cognition- and Affect-based Trust in Managers’ Professional Networks. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3): 436-452.

Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Clark, M. S., Mills, J. ve Powell, M. C. (1986). Keeping Track of Needs in Communal

and Exchange Relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(2): 333-338.

Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A. ve LePine J. A. (2007). 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), 425–445.

Conway, N. ve Briner, R. (2002). A daily diary study of affective responses to psychological contract breach and exceeded promises.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 287-302.

Cook, J. ve Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfillment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 39-52.

Cook, K. and R. Cooper (2003) ‘Experimental Studies of Cooperation, Trust, and Social Exchange’. E. Ostrom and J. Walker (eds) Trust and Reciprocity (pp. 209– 44). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Cox, J. C. (2004). How to identify trust and reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 46, 260–281.

Craswell, R. (1993). On the uses of ‘Trust’: Comment on Williamson. Journal of Law and Economics, 36, 487–500.

Creed, D. R. ve Miles, R. E. (1996). Trust in organizations: A conceptual framework linking organizational forms, managerial philosophies, and the opportunity costs of controls. In R. M. Kramer ve T. R. Tyler, Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research (pp. 16-38). London: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cropanzano, R. ve Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874-900.

Cummings L. L. ve Bromiley P., (1996). The Organizational Trust Inventory (OTI): Development and Validation in R. M. Kramer ve T. R. Tyler (eds.) Trust in

Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research (pp. 302-330). California: Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.

Cunliffe, A. L. (2010). Crafting Qualitative Research: Morgan and Smircich 30 Years On. Organizational Research Methods, 1-27. doi:10.1177/1094428110373658. Cunningham, J. B. ve MacGregor, J. (2000). Trust and Design of Work:

Complementary Constructs in Satisfaction and Performance. Human Relations, 53(12): 1575-1591.

Currall, S. C. ve Inkpen, A. C. (2006). On the Complexity of Organizational Trust: A Multi-level Co-Evolutionary Perspective and Guidelines for Future Research. In R. Bachmann ve A. Zaheer, The Handbook of Trust Research (pp. 235-246). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Currall, S.C. ve Judge, T.A. (1995). Measuring trust between organizational

boundary role persons. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 64(2): 151–70.

Curseu, P. L. ve Schruijer, S. G. (2010). Does conflict shatter trust or does trust obliterate conflict? Revisiting the relationships between team diversity, conflict, and trust. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 14(1): 66-79. Das, T. K. ve Teng, B. (2004). The Risk-Based View of Trust: A Conceptual

Framework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(1): 85-116.,

Dasgupta, P. (1988). Trust as a commodity. In: Gambetta, D., Editor, 1988. Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations (pp. 49-72), New York: Basil Blackwell.

Davis, J., Schoorman, F., Mayer, R. ve Tan, H. (2000), The trusted general managerand business unit performance: Empirical evidence of a competitive advantage, Strategic Management Journal, 21: 563-76.

De Jong, S.,Van der Vegt, G.S. ve Molleman, E. (2007). The Relationships among Asymmetry in Task Dependence, Perceived Helping Behavior, and Trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6): 1625-1637.

Deutsch, M., (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(4): 265– 279.

Dimoka, A. (2010). What Does the Brain Tell Us About Trust and Distrust? Evidence from a Functional Neuroimaging Study. MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 373-396.

Dirks, K. T. ve Ferrin, D. L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12, 450-467.

Dirks, K. T. ve Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for organizational research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611- 628.

Dirks, K. T., Lewicki, R. J. ve Zaheer, A. (2009). Reparing Relationships Within and Between Organizations: Building a Conceptual Foundation. Academy of

Management Review, 34 (1), 68-84.

Doney, P. M., Cannon J. P. ve Mullen., M. R. (1998). Understanding the Influence of National Culture on the Development of Trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 601-620.

Earley, P.C. (1986). Trust, perceived importance of praise and criticism, and work performance: an examination of feedback in the United States and England. Journal of Management, 12, 457-73

Erdem, F. ve Aytemur, J. Ö. (2009). Türk i Örgütlerinin Sosyal Sermaye Birikimini Gelitirmede Belirleyici Unsur Olan Güvenin Anlalmasna Yönelik Özgün Bir Ölçek Gelitirme Projesi (Proje No. 107K548). Ankara: TÜB
TAK.

Ferres, N., Connell, J. ve Travaglione, A. (2004). Co-worker trust as a social catalyst for constructive employee attitudes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19, 608– 622.

Ferrin, D. L., Bligh, M. C. ve Kohles, J. C. (2008). It Takes Two to Tango: An Interdependence Analysis of the Spiraling of Perceived Trustworthiness and Cooperation in Interpersonal and Intergroup Relationships. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 107, 161–178.

Fishbein M. A. ve Ajzen I., (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior, Addison- Wesley, Reading.

Fiske, S. T. ve Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York: McGraw Hill. Frantz, C. ve Benningson, C. (2005). Better late than early: The influence of timing

on apology effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41 (2), 201-207.

Frenkel, S. ve Sanders, K. (2007). Explaining variations in co-worker assistance in organizations. Organization Studies. 28, 797-823.

Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.

Gabarro, J. J. (1978). The development of trust influence and expectations. In A. Anthony ve J. J. Gabarro, Interpersonal Behavior: Communication and

understanding in relationships (pp. 290-303). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Gambetta, D. (1988). Can we trust trust? In D. Gambetta (ed.), Trust: Making and

Breaking Cooperative Relations. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell: 213-239. Gamson, W. A. (1968). Power and discontent. Dorsey, Homewood, IL.

Gelfand, M. J., Erez, M. ve Aycan, Z. (2007). Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 479 –514.

Gelfand, M. J., Major, V. S., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L. H. ve O'Brien, K. (2006). Negotiating Relationally: The Dynamics of the Relational Self in Negotiations. Academy of Management Review, 31 (2), 427-451.

Gilbert, J. A. ve Tang, T. L. (1998). An examination of organizational trust antecedents. Public Personnel Management, 27(3), 321-335.

Gillespie, N. ve Dietz, G. (2009). Trust repair after organization-level failure. Academy of Management Review, 34 (1), 127-145.

Gioia, D. ve Pitre, E. (1990). Multiparadigm Perspectives on Theory Building. Academy of Management Review, 15, 584–602.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.

Golembiewski, R. ve McConkie M. (1975). The centrality of interpersonal trust in group process. In C. Cooper (ed.), Theories of Group Process. New York: Wiley, 131–185.

Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-78.

Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3): 481–510.

Griffin., K. (1967). The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication department. Psychological Bulletin, 68: 104-120.

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley. Hiebert, Paul G. (1985). Anthropological Insights for Missionaries, Grand Rapids:

Baker Book House.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, Leadership, and Organization: Do American Theories Apply Abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 9(1), 42-63.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences, Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.

Hosmer, L. T. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 379-402.

Hsu, M. H., Ju, T. L., Yen, C. H. ve Chang, C. M. (2007). Knowledge sharing

behavior in virtual communities: The relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 65(2), 153-169.

Huang, X. ve Van de Vliert, E. (2006). Job formalization and cultural individualism as barriers to trust in management: Trust in management in 46 countries.

International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 6, 221-242.

Inglehart, R. (1999). Trust, Well-Being and Democracy, in M. E. Warren (Eds.) Democracy and Trust (pp. 88-120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jammal, E. (2010). Trust prototypes in Arab-German Business relations. 5th

Workshop on Trust within and between organizations. Madrid-Spain. European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management.

Jarvenpaa, S. L. ve Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815.

Johnson, J. L. ve Cullen, J. B. (2002). Trust in Cross-Cultural Relationships. , In M. Gannon ve K. Newman (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management (pp. 335-361). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Johnson-George, C. ve Swap, W.C. (1982). Measurement of Specific Interpersonal Trust: Construction and Validation of a Scale to Assess Trust in a Specific Other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(6), 1306–1317.

Jones, G.R. ve George, J. M. (1998). The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 531–46.

Jøsang, A., Ismail, R., Boyd, C. (2007). A Survey of Trust and Reputation Systems for Online Service Provision. Decision Support Systems, 43(2), 618-644.

Kee. H. W. ve Knox. R. E. (1970). Conceptual and methodological considerations in the study of trust. Journal of Conflict Resolution. 14, 357-366.

Kelley, H. H. ve Thibaut, J. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley.

Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L. ve Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, risk, and their antecedents. Decision Support Systems, 44, 544-564.

Kim, P. H., Dirks, K. T. ve Cooper, C. D. (2009). The Repair of Trust: A Dynamic Bilateral Perspective and Multilevel Conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 34 (3), 401-422.

Kim, P. H., Dirks, K. T., Cooper, C. D. ve Ferrin, D. L. (2006). When more blame is better than less: the implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-related trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 49-65.

Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. D. ve Dirks, K. T. (2004). Removing the shadow of suspicion: the effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-related trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 104- 118.

Kimmel, M., Pruitt, D., Magenau, J., Konar-Goldband, E. ve Carnevale, P. (1980). Effects of Trust, Aspiration, and Gender on Negotiation Tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 9-22.

King, N. (2004). Using interviews in qualitative research, In C.Cassell and G.Symon (Eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research (pp. 11-22). London: Sage.

King-Casas, B., Tomlin, D., Anen, C., Camerer, C. F., Quartz, S. R. Ve Montague, P. R. (2005). Getting to know you: Reputation and trust in a two-person economic exchange. Science, 308, 7883.

Komiak, X. S. Ve Benbasat, I. (2006). The Effects of Personalization and Familiarity on Trust in and Adoption of Recommendation Agents. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 30(4): 941-960.

Konovsky, M. Ve Cropanzano, R. (1991). Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 698-707.

Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology , 50, 569-598.

Kramer, R.M. (1994). The sinister attribution error: Paranoid Cognition and Collective Distrust in Organizations. Motivation and Emotion, 18(2): 199–231. Kramer, R.M. ve Tyler, T.R. (1996). Whither trust? In R.M. Kramer and T.R. Tyler

(eds), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, 1–15. London: Sage Publications.

Kuusela, H. ve Paul, P. (2000). A comparison of concurrent and retrospective verbal protocol analysis. The American Journal of Psychology, 113(3): 387-405.

Lämsä, A. ve Pucetaite, R. (2006). Development of organizational trust among employees from a contextual perspective. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(2): 130-141.

Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4): 691-710.

Larzelere, R.E. ve Huston, T.L. (1980). The dyadic trust scale: toward understanding interpersonal trust in close relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 595-604.

Laschinger, H.K.S., Finegan, J., Shamian, J. ve Casier, S. (2000). Organizational trust and empowerment in restructured healthcare settings. Journal of Nursing Administration, 30(9): 413-25.

Lau, D. ve Liden, R.C. (2008). Antecedents of coworker trust: leaders’ blessings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5): 1130-1138.

Levine, J. M., Resnick, L. B. Ve Higgins, E. T. (1993). Social Foundations of Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 585-612.

Lewicki, R. J. ve Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and Maintaining Trust In Working Relationships. In R. M. Kramer ve T. R. Tyler (eds), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, 114-139. London: Sage Publications.

Lewicki, R. J. Ve Wiethoff, C. (2000). Trust, Trust Development, and Trust Repair. In M. Deutsch ve P. T. Coleman, The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 86-107). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J. Ve Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and Distrust: New Relationships and Realities. Academy of Management Review, 23 (3): 438-458.

Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C. ve Gillespie, N. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust