Developing and Measuring Sub-Dimensions of Cognitive and

Emotional Trust in Supervisor

Pei Liu

and Wan Fen Guo

School of Management and Economics, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, China

The International College, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China

delicatemechanics@163.com,

guowanfen@xmu.edu.cn, *Corresponding author

Keywords: Cognitive & Emotional Trust in Supervisor, Sub-Dimension Models, Sub-Scales, Psychometric Properties.

Abstract: This paper built a hierarchical framework of cognitive & emotional trust which is composed of two higher-

order constructs and six sub-dimensions. Cognitive trust consists of 1) expectations based on competence,

2) benevolence, and 3) integrity. Emotional trust consists of 1) emotional linkage, 2) identification, and 3)

depending willingness. This framework was represented by a second-order factor model and verified by 301

Chinese and 952 Japanese employee samples. In addition, a set of measures were developed to

operationalize this framework. The psychometric properties of original measures were validated by both

Chinese and Japanese samples.

1 INTRODUCTION

In recent year, the role of employees’ trust in

supervisor has attracted attention, confronted with

the increasing uncertainty in business environment.

Although prior researches have established some

empirical relationships between trust in supervisor

and employees’ attitudes/behaviors (Dirk & Ferrin,

2002), the theories to explain the influence paths are

still lacking. Moreover, there is little cross-national

comparative data on trust in supervisor, even though

it is largely affected by culture.

For this reason, the Influence of Trust on Work-

Related Attitudes and Behaviors (ITWAB) project is

carrying out a series of hierarchical cross-national

comparison to clarify such influence paths (Liu & Li,

2015b). To accomplish this, we need to

systematically conceptualize and operationalize the

trust in supervisor under a second-order framework.

In an early work (Liu & Li, 2015a), we developed

two higher-order constructs in framework and their

measures: cognitive trust in supervisor (CT): defined

as the positive expectations & willingness to be

vulnerable based on “the cognition of supervisor’s

traits;” emotional trust in supervisor (ET): defined

as the positive expectations & willingness to be

vulnerable rooted in “a high-quality long-term

relationship with the supervisor.”In current paper,

we develop CT & ET’s six sub-dimensions and sub-

scales so as to test the second-order framework with

Chinese and Japanese samples.

2 THEORY AND HYPOTHESES

Liu & Li (2015a) proposed two theoretical ideas that

CT’s function is to secure the productivity of social

exchange relationship (SER) by focusing on the

outcome of exchange from the perspective of “gains

and losses;” whereas ET’s function is to build up a

base of the long-term relationship by focusing on the

process of exchange itself from the perspective of

“maintaining SER.” It is useful to ground the two

ideas on Cartwright & Zandler’s (1968) classic

theory of social power.

The points of Cartwright & Zandler’s theory are

the core causation and power sources underlying

social power. First, when the supervisor’s specific

action A causes a change in the state S of an

employee, we say “the supervisor influences the

state S of that employee.” And, the supervisor’s

social power with respect to S means that the

supervisor can influence S of that employee (i.e., the

supervisor has capacity to perform A). Thus, A → S

is the core causation underlying social power in this

definition. Second, such A → S causations are

premised on at least two kinds of power sources.

One is employee’s need bases that can be classified

into three groups: Existence, Relatedness, and

Growth Needs, according to ERG theory (Alderfer,

1972), as shown in Table 1. The other is supervisor’s

resource bases defined as the expected value

(amount of resource subjective probability) of how

Liu P. and Guo W.

Developing and Measuring Sub-Dimensions of Cognitive and Emotional Trust in Supervisor.

DOI: 10.5220/0006019600880093

In Proceedings of the Information Science and Management Engineering III (ISME 2015), pages 88-93

ISBN: 978-989-758-163-2

Table 1: The A → S causations & power sources underlying each sub-dimension of CT & ET.

→

CT’s sub-

dimensions

Supervisor’s resource bases Concrete A

Specific facets of S

(performance, growth, &

rewards)

Employee's need bases underlying

such facets of S

Expectations

based on

competence

The expertise, achievements, and

personal connections

Efforts to plan the goals/projects

which can create chances for

employees to grow

The potential level of

expertise improvement

Want to improve expertise (Growth)

The potential level of

career development

Want to achieve a successful career

(Growth)

Expectations

based on

benevolence

The authority in management

Making managerial decisions that

take employees' career

development into consideration

The probability of obtain-

ing good chance to grow

Want to grow and achieve a

successful career (Growth)

Making managerial decisions that

take the employee's particular

circumstance into consideration

The probability of

suffering the losses due to

weak position

Not want to suffer the losses due to

the weak position in hierarchy

(Existence)

Expectations

based on

integrity

The high morals, and a healthy

value system

Always having the good sense to

prevent troubles

The probability of

suffering the losses due to

troubles

Not want to be involved in troubles

(Existence)

Not want personal rights and

interests to be infringed (Existence)

The high consistency

Making decisions and instructing

consistently so as not to toss about

employees' work life

The probability of time &

energy wasting,

performance worsening

Not want to waste time and energy

(Existence)

ET’s sub-

dimensions

Supervisor’s resource bases Concrete A

Specific facets of S

(warmth & happiness in

work life)

Employee's need bases underlying

such facets of S

Emotional

linkage

The emotional tie with the

employee

Empathizing the employee (i.e.

reproducing his/her emotions) and

communicating sincerely with

him/her

The pleasure of

communication

Want his/her emotions to be

understood by the supervisor

(Relatedness)

Want to be connected emotionally

with the supervisor (Relatedness)

Identifica-

tion

The unification of the long-term

interests, and values with the

employee

Considering "what is good for the

employee's career?" and backing

him/her up from his/her point of

view (i.e. reproducing his/her

thoughts)

The meaningfulness of the

sense of belonging

Want his/her thoughts to be

understood by the supervisor

(Relatedness)

The attractiveness of supervisor's

way of thinking and values

Want to belong to a in-group where

members have shared the long-term

interests and values (Relatedness)

Depending

willingness

The norm of reciprocity

according to which supervisor

can expect that the employee will

give back in future

Cooperating with and taking care

of the employee in good faith both

officially and privately

The warmth of the

relationship rich in mutual

obligations

Want to further develop the

relationship with the supervisor

through deepening obligations

(Relatedness)

The mutual obligations in the

relationship with the employee

many resources the employee can obtain from the

supervisor. Therefore, it is helpful to reveal how CT

& ET differ in (1) core causation and (2) the power

sources, as shown in Table 1.

Based on Cartwright & Zandler (1968), CT can

be regarded as employee’s cognition such that “how

much social power the supervisor has with respect to

the performance, growth, and rewards in my

career?” The core causation underlying CT is the

supervisor’s actions → performance, growth, and

rewards in the employee's career. The need bases

are existence & growth needs mainly, and the

resource bases are chiefly the objective resources

with general usefulness (Liu & Li, 2015a; b).

ET, on the other hand, can be considered as

employee’s sense such that “how much social power

the supervisor has with respect to the warmth &

happiness in my work life?” The core causation

underlying ET is the supervisor's actions → warmth

& happiness in the employee’s work life. The need

bases are relatedness needs mainly, and the resource

bases are chiefly the subjective resources with

personal happiness (Liu & Li, 2015a; b).

On the grounds that CT & ET are different in (1)

core causation and (2) power sources, it is

reasonable to think that:

H1: CT & ET are different kinds of social power.

We first develop a three sub-dimension model of

CT drawing on prior studies. Then, by distinguishing

the core causation and power sources underlying

each sub-dimension, we attempt to provide a

theoretical ground for this model. As to the traits

Developing and Measuring Sub-Dimensions of Cognitive and Emotional Trust in Supervisor

ofustee, Mayer et al. (1995) developed a conceptual

model consisting of trustee’s ability, benevolence,

and integrity. McKnight et al. (2002) reported a

series of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)

evidence consistent with Mayer et al.’s conceptual

model. Hence, we propose the following three sub-

dimension model corresponding with above studies.

 Expectations based on Competence: The positive

expectations that are formed from the cognition

such that “the supervisor’s capability is sufficient

to fulfill the role of manager for goal

achievement.” As summarized in Table 1, this

sub-dimension reflects the supervisor’s social

power with respect to the employee’s potential

level to grow.

 Expectations based on Benevolence: The positive

expectations that are formed from the cognition

such that “the supervisor is benevolent to me.”

This sub-dimension mirrors the supervisor’s

social power with respect to the probability of

the employee obtaining the chance to grow and

suffering the losses due to weak position.

 Expectations based on Integrity: The positive

expectations that are formed from the cognition

such that “the supervisor has high moral

standards, values, and consistency.” This sub-

dimension reflects the supervisor’s social power

with respect to the probability of the employee

suffering the losses due to troubles.

H2: CT can be divided into three sub-dimensions:

(1) expectations based on competence, (2)

benevolence, and (3) integrity.

We first identify originally three sub-dimensions

of ET from the arguments of trust literatures. Then

we carefully distinguish the core causation and

power sources underlying each sub-dimension.

Drawing on previous studies’ arguments about ET,

we identified three important facets of relationship

—the emotional tie, shared long-term interests &

values, and mutual obligations--which are consistent

with three social psychological mechanisms studied

in the fields of social power and SER. Thus we

propose the following three sub-dimension model:

 Emotional Linkage: The positive expectations

that are formed from the emotional tie with the

supervisor. This sub-dimension mirrors the

supervisor’s social power with respect to how

pleasant the employee feels the communication

with him/her to be. And this sub-dimension is

rooted in the mechanism of sympathy.

 Identification: The positive expectations that are

formed from a sense of belonging to an in-group

where members (including the supervisor) have

shared the long-term interests and values. This

sub-dimension reflects the supervisor’s social

power with respect to how meaningful the

employee feels the sense of belonging to be. And

this sub-dimension is rooted in the mechanism of

perspective taking.

 Depending Willingness: The willingness to

deepen the mutual obligations with the

supervisor in order to develop further the

relationship with him/her, based on the positive

expectations for his/her cooperation. This sub-

dimension mirrors the supervisor’s social power

with respect to how warm the employee feels the

relationship rich in mutual obligations to be. And

this sub-dimension is rooted in the mechanism of

(norm of) reciprocity.

H3: ET can be divided into three sub-dimensions:

(1) emotional linkage, (2) identification, and (3)

depending willingness.

3 METHOD

3.1 Item Development

In ITWAB project, we developed Cognitive &

Emotional Trust Scale-Short Form (CTS-S & ETS-S)

to operationalize the hierarchical framework (Liu,

2013). Liu & Li (2015a) examined the psychometric

properties of the two higher-order scales in CTS-S &

ETS-S such that each has a single factor structure of

14 items, based on Item Response Theory (IRT).

This paper further tested the psychometric properties

of the six sub-scales in CTS-S & ETS-S, based on

Classic Test Theory. The reason is because the well-

established method in IRT can only deal with the

scale with single factor structure, such as each

higher-order scales in CTS-S & ETS-S. The 28

items of CTS-S & ETS-S were expressed in Chinese

and Japanese. A linguist checked the semantic and

syntactic equivalence of both versions.

In CTS-S (14 items), CT’s three sub-dimensions

were operationalized as “the positive expectations

based on the supervisor’ competence, benevolence,

and integrity” respectively. For measuring

expectations based on competence, we selected 5

items from the 19 items of Cognitive Trust Scale

(CTS)--a 43-item scale developed in ITWAB project

(Liu, 2013). For expectations based on benevolence,

we selected 4 items from the 9 items of CTS. And,

for expectations based on integrity, we selected 5

items from the 15 items of CTS.

ISME 2015 - Information Science and Management Engineering III

ISME 2015 - International Conference on Information System and Management Engineering

Table 2: Sub-scale reliability and item descriptive statistics and factor loadings.

CHN

n =301

JPN

n =952

CHN

n =301

JPN

n =952

1. My supervisor is known to be successful in both professional and social life 4.03(1.38) 4.62(1.56) .76 .84

2. My supervisor is well qualified for the post 4.28(1.57) 4.99(1.49) .88 .90

3. My supervisor is competent and effective in providing professional advice 4.10(1.53) 4.89(1.48) .90 .90

4. Given my supervisor's track record, I see no reason to doubt his/her competence and

preparation for the job

4.18(1.52) 4.94(1.47) .90 .91

5. My supervisor will form well thought-out plans about his/her job 4.10(1.52) 4.77(1.51) .87 .91

6. I believe that my supervisor would act in my best interest 4.26(1.45) 4.44(1.62) .89 .91

7. I can expect my supervisor to consider my needs and aims from my standpoint 4.04(1.50) 4.40(1.58) .92 .90

8. If I required help, my supervisor would do his/her best to help me 4.35(1.54) 4.73(1.53) .91 .90

9. My supervisor is very concerned about my career, not just his/her own 4.07(1.50) 4.34(1.66) .88 .86

10. My supervisor has a strong sense of justice and morality 4.29(1.42) 4.74(1.56) .90 .93

11. My supervisor is very consistent in decisions and behaviors 4.13(1.50) 4.55(1.62) .89 .88

12. My supervisor is sincere and genuine 4.16(1.51) 4.62(1.58) .80 .90

13. My supervisor care about the future of our organization 4.26(1.45) 4.85(1.54) .84 .90

14. My supervisor tries hard to behave on the basis of sound principles 4.28(1.46) 4.90(1.55) .89 .87

1. My supervisor and I always talk with each other heart to heart 3.86(1.51) 4.45(1.59) .86 .84

2. I would usually talk with my supervisor about personal troubles 3.64(1.52) 3.62(1.60) .77 .66

3. I enjoy working with my supervisor very much 3.70(1.48) 4.31(1.46) .93 .96

4. My supervisor and I recognize and find a kindred spirit in each other 3.89(1.49) 4.24(1.45) .94 .86

5. My supervisor and I always talk about our work experience and opinions with each other 3.86(1.46) 4.33(1.54) .88 .85

6. My values are similar with my supervisor 3.52(1.52) 4.20(1.40) .86 .81

7. My supervisor is the kind of person one would like to have as a friend 3.67(1.57) 4.32(1.61) .89 .87

8. I feel a sense of gratitude towards my supervisor 4.04(1.59) 4.50(1.61) .88 .85

9. I feel close to my supervisor because we have a similar way of thinking 3.61(1.54) 4.25(1.54) .90 .88

10. I have a strong sense of comradeship with my supervisor 3.91(1.55) 4.28(1.59) .91 .90

11. I would be willing to provide the know-how about how to settle critical work-related

problem to my supervisor

4.35(1.45) 4.90(1.39) .81 .78

12. I would be willing to ask my supervisor to solve some difficult problems for me, even if

s(he) has no obligation for these matters

3.54(1.50) 4.07(1.61) .78 .75

13. Faced with a difficult work situation, I would be willing to work together with my

supervisor shoulder to shoulder

4.10(1.47) 5.12(1.37) .89 .76

14. I would feel secure in using the work-related information from supervisor 4.22(1.48) 4.94(1.42) .88 .87

Emotional linkage (CHN,

=.97; JPN,

=.94)

Identification (CHN,

=.97; JPN,

=.95)

Depending willingness (CHN,

=.94; JPN,

=.90)

M (SD ) Factor loadings

14 items of CTS-S

Expectations based on competence (CHN,

=.96; JPN,

=.94)

Expectations based on benevolence (CHN,

=.90; JPN,

=.94)

Expectations based on integrity (CHN,

=.95; JPN,

=.94)

In ETS-S (14 items), emotional linkage and

identification were operationalized as “the positive

expectations based on the emotional tie and the

shared long-term interests & values with the

supervisor” respectively. And, depending

willingness was operationalized as “the willingness

to deepen the mutual obligations with the supervisor

(i.e., to positively take the risk due to being in the

supervisor’s debt), based on the positive

expectations for his/her cooperation.” For measuring

emotional linkage, we selected 5 items from the 14

items of Emotional Trust Scale (ETS)--a 45-item

scale developed by (Liu, 2013). For identification,

we selected 5 items from the 16 items of ETS. And,

for depending willingness, we selected 4 items from

the 15 items of ETS.

3.2 Sub-Scale Content Validity

Three researchers in ITWAB project team checked

the content validity of the six sub-scales. All

members have reached a consensus that each of the

28 items is a good representative sample of the

corresponding sub-scale’s definition. This implies

that for each of the six sub-scales, its operational

definition corresponded well to its theoretical

definition. Therefore, the content validity of the six

sub-scales was confirmed.

Developing and Measuring Sub-Dimensions of Cognitive and Emotional Trust in Supervisor

3.3 Cross-National Samples

The data was collected from China and Japan in

2013, via the specified websites. The language

expression between the questionnaire’s Chinese and

Japanese version was checked by a linguist.

Chinese employees’ samples (n = 301) were

gathered from seven cities of China: Shenzhen,

Guiyang, Huainan, Tianjin, Shenyang, Anshan, and

Jilin. 48.2% of respondents were male and 51.8%

were female. Their average age was 31.39 years (SD

= 7.48), average job tenure was 6.25 years (SD =

7.31), and the average length of time having worked

with the current supervisor was 4.43 years (SD =

5.02). In terms of education, 6.3% had high school

or vocational degrees, 23.9% had junior college

degrees, 39.9% had college degrees, and 29.9% had

graduate degrees. In terms of post, 49.8% were

general employees, 18.9% were low level managers,

17.3% were middle level managers, 6.3% were top

level managers, and others (7.6%).

Japanese employees’ samples (n = 952) were

collected from all over Japan through a research

company. 55.3% of respondents were male and

44.7% were female. Their average age was 38.74

years (SD = 6.50), average job tenure was 12.91

years (SD = 7.63), and the average length of time

having worked with the current supervisor was 4.13

years (SD = 4.45). In terms of education, 26.1% had

high school degrees, 23.8% had junior college or

vocational degrees, 41.5% had college degrees, and

8.6% had graduate degrees. In terms of post, 43.2%

were general employees, 28.0% and 23.6% were low

and middle level managers, respectively, and others

(5.1%).

3.4 Measures

All variables were measured on a 7-point scale form

1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.

Distributive justice was measured using 3 items

(Chinese α = .93, Japanese α = .92). An example

item was “My salary and treatment reflect the effort

I have put into the work.” Disappointment was

measured with 2 items (Chinese α = .75, Japanese α

= .63). An example item was “Altogether, my

expectations for my supervisor have been

disappointed.” Altruistic behavior for supervisor

was measured using 2 items (Chinese α = .93,

Japanese α = .93). An example item was “I

sometimes sacrifice my own interests to help the

supervisor.”

4 RESULTS

To assess the reliability of the six sub-scales, we

computed Cronbach’s α of them. As presented in

Table 2, for both Chinese and Japanese version, all

six sub-scales met the criterion of α ≥ .07. In

addition, the means and standard deviations of the

six sub-scales were reported in Table 3. For all six

sub-scales, the means of Chinese versions were

consistently higher than those of Japanese versions

(t-test, p < .001).

Model fit indices

(df )

SRMR C FI RMS EA AIC

Hypothesized 6 factor model 3022.040 (686) .000 .033 .943 .052 3274.040

(1)

5 factor model combining competence

& benevolence

4136.104 (688) .000 .037 .916 .063 4384.104

(2)

5 factor model combining benevolence

& integrity

3642.015 (688) .000 .035 .928 .059 3890.015

(3)

5 factor model combining competence

& integrity

3713.757 (688) .000 .037 .927 .059 3961.757

(4)

4 factor model combining competence,

benevolence, & integrity

4542.165 (692) .000 .039 .907 .067 4782.165

(5)

5 factor model combining emotional

linkage & identification

3223.916 (688) .000 .031 .938 .054 3471.916

(6)

5 factor model combining identification

& depending willingness

3378.789 (688) .000 .032 .935 .056 3626.789

(7)

5 factor model combining Emotional

linkage & Depending willingness

3536.882 (688) .000 .035 .931 .058 3784.882

(8)

4 factor model combining emotional

linkage, identification, & depending

willingness

3698.079 (692) .000 .034 .927 .059 3938.079

(9)

2 factor model combining CT's three

sub-dimensions to one factor and ET's

three sub-dimensions to the other factor

5217.842 (698) .000 .036 .890 .072 5445.842

Alternative models of ET' sub-dimensional structure

Alternative models of CT' sub-dimensional structure

Jonit estimation: CHN (n = 301) & JPN (n = 952)

Figure 1: The second-roder factor model.

To test the convergent and discriminant validity

of the six sub-scales, we compared “the intra-group

correlations among the same higher-order

construct’s sub-scales” and “the inter-group

correlations among the different higher-order

constructs’ sub-scales.” As shown in Table 3, for

ISME 2015 - Information Science and Management Engineering III

ISME 2015 - International Conference on Information System and Management Engineering

Table 3: Sub-scale descriptive statistics and correlation pattern.

Mean (SD)

CHN

Mean (SD)

JPN

Mean

difference

Compet-

ence

Benevol-

ence

Integrity

Emotional

linkage

Identifica-

tion

Depending

willingness

Distributive

justice

Disappoint

-ment

Altruistic

behavior

Competence 4.84(1.38) 4.14(1.26) .71***

.82*** .84***

.65*** .73*** .72*** .35*** -.47*** .27***

Benevolence 4.48(1.47) 4.15(1.31) .32***

.79***

.86***

.76*** .79*** .75*** .36*** -.47*** .23***

Integrity 4.73(1.44) 4.23(1.27) .50***

.85*** .86***

- .72*** .78*** .75*** .36*** -.47*** .28***

Emotional linkage

4.19(1.33) 3.79(1.29) .40***

.65*** .76*** .72*** -

.88*** .78***

.29*** -.40*** .30***

Identification

4.31(1.38) 3.78(1.37) .53***

.71*** .79*** .77***

.88***

.85***

.32*** -.44*** .32***

Depending willingness

4.76(1.23) 4.06(1.23) .70***

.70*** .69*** .71***

.77*** .82***

- .25*** -.39*** .36***

Distributive justice 3.99(1.44) 3.73(1.16) .26** .40*** .48*** .43*** .42*** .48*** .45*** - -.30*** .06

Disappointment 3.72(1.38) 4.06(.95) -.34*** -.37*** -.45*** -.43*** -.36*** -.41*** -.37*** -.39*** - -.02

Altruistic behavior 4.43(1.30) 3.98(1.05) .45*** .14* .20*** .11 .27*** .27*** .27*** .07 .09 -

The lower triangular part = Chinese dada (n = 301). The upper triangular part = Japanese dada (n = 475). ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05.

both Chinese and Japanese version, the intra-group

correlation coefficients among CT’s (or ET’s) three

sub-scales were stronger than the inter-group

correlation coefficients between CT’s sub-scales and

ET’s sub-scales on average. Thus, the convergent

validities of the sub-scales within each of the higher-

order constructs (CT & ET), and the discriminant

validities of CT’s sub-scales from ET’s sub-scales

were confirmed.

To further test the construct validity of the six

sub-scales, as shown in Table 3, we computed the

correlations between them and some external

variables. For both Chinese and Japanese version,

the six sub-scales were positively related to

distributive justice and negatively related to

disappointment (antecedents); and positively related

to altruistic behavior for supervisor (effect)

consistently. This correlation pattern was consistent

with Dirks & Ferrin’s (2002) meta-analysis results.

Hence the construct validity of the six sub-scales

was (re)confirmed.

To test the three hypotheses, we built a second-

order factor model to represent them. As shown in

Figure 1, by joint estimation with Chinese and

Japanese samples, the hypothesized model met the

criterion of CFI ≥ .95 & SRMR ≤ .08, and was

superior to all alternative factor models in Akaike’s

Information Criterion (AIC). Thus the second-order

factor model was configural invariant across

Chinese and Japanese samples. Therefore, all three

hypotheses were supported by the two countries’

samples.

5 CONCLUSIONS

The first purpose of this paper is to develop the sub-

dimension models of CT & ET so as to test an

original hierarchical framework (Figure 1). The

three hypotheses describing the configuration of this

framework were supported by Chinese and Japanese

samples. This fact suggests that each of the two

trusts has a general sub-dimensional structure, and

our sub-dimension model capture it well.

The second purpose is to assess the psychometric

properties of the six sub-scales in CTS-S & ETS-S,

which operationalize the six sub-dimensions. The

results of psychometric analyses validated the six

sub-scales for both Chinese and Japanese version.

REFERENCES

Alderfer, C. P., 1972. Existence, relatedness, and growth.

New York: Free Press.

Cartwright, D., Zander, A., 1968. Group dynamics:

Research and theory. New York: Harper & Row.

Dirks, K. T., Ferrin, D. L., 2002. Trust in leadership: Meta

-analytic findings and implications for organizational

research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628.

Liu, P., 2013. The dimensional structure and scale

development of cognitive- and emotional-trust: Using

Japanese and Chinese samples, Kobe University

Graduate Student Working Paper No. 201305a.

Liu, P., Li, Z., 2015b. Theoretical ideas on the functions of

cognitive and emotional trust: A cross-national

comparison between China and Japan based on IRT.

Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on

Education, Management and Systems Engineering

(EMSE2015; ISTP-CPCI & EI).

Liu, P., Li, Z., 2015b. A hierarchical comparison on

influence paths from cognitive & emotional trust to

proactive behavior between China and Japan,

Advances in Social Science, Education and

Humanities Research (ASSEHR; ISTP-CPCI).

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., 1995. An

integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of

Management Review. 20, 709–734.

McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., Kacmar, C., 2002.

Developing and validating trust measures for E-

commerce: An integrative typology. Information

Systems Research, 13, 334-359.

Developing and Measuring Sub-Dimensions of Cognitive and Emotional Trust in Supervisor