ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2025
Trust then talk or talk then trust? The coevolution of communication networks and inter-organizational trust.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Trust serves an important purpose in organizations composed of numerous, specialized, interdependent roles. Supporting confidence that individuals will dutifully fulfill the responsibilities of those roles without causing harm to the organization, trust enables coordinated task execution across multiple roles and facilitates information exchange among individuals by reducing cognitive resources spent verifying information accuracy and reliability. Interactions play an important role in shaping and updating trust, but the mechanisms underlying the relationship between communication networks and trust dynamics remain poorly understood. This paper addresses that gap by directly examining the coevolution of communication networks and trust. During a multi-day military training exercise, participants (n=83) from three distinct units formed a coalition organization largely focused on collecting, analyzing, and acting on information gleaned from the operating environment of roughly 10k units under their command. Over the course of the exercise, each participant provided eight ratings of trust in their own unit and their coalition partners' units. Static and dynamic network models of the organization's communication networks assessed whether trust is an antecedent or product of communication. Results consistently show that when individuals report elevated trust in a unit, they become more likely to form and sustain relationships to members of that unit during the next time period. They also increase their rates of communication to those unit members. However, this relationship does not work in reverse: Increased communication to a unit does not precede increased trust in that unit. These findings suggest temporal directionality in the coevolution of trust and communication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.