Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This Commentary challenges the application of the participant stance view of trust in firms, suggesting ambiguities in trust relationships.
Kim and Routledge (2022) offer a normative account of trust in firms, drawing on a philosophical approach to trust, “the participant stance.” This Commentary raises a challenge to Kim and Routledge. For a participant stance view of trust to be applicable to firms, we argue that firms must be seen as fitting targets and sources of reactive attitudes in morally relevant trust relationships. It is far from clear that firms are a fitting target within Kim and Routledge’s account.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pouryousefi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: