How Trust Works: The Science of How Relationships Are Built, Broken, and Repaired

by Peter H. Kim

From the world's leading expert on trust repair, a guide to understanding the most essential foundation of our relationships and communities.

When our trust is broken, and when our own trustworthiness is called into question, many of us are left wondering what to do. We barely know how trust works. How could we possibly repair it?

Dr. Peter H. Kim, the world’s leading expert in the rapidly growing field of trust repair, has conducted over two decades of groundbreaking research to answer that question. In How Trust Works , he draws on this research and the work of other social scientists to reveal the surprising truths about how relationships are built, how they are broken, and how they are repaired. Dr. Kim’s work shows how we are often more trusting than we think and how easily our trust in others can be distorted. He illustrates these insights with accounts of some of the most striking and well-known trust violations that have occurred in modern times and unveils the crucial secrets behind when and why our attempts to repair trust are effective, and which breaches of confidence are just too deep.

How Trust Works transforms our understanding of our deepest bonds, giving us the tools to build strong and supportive relationships on every level. With our families, coworkers, and friends. With the groups, organizations, and institutions that touch our lives. And even with societies and nations.

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction, Self Help, Relationships, Science, Leadership, Sociology

256 pages, Hardcover

Published August 15, 2023

Reviews

[Chris Boutté · Rating 5 out of 5]

I absolutely love books on trust. It’s such an interesting topic to me. The fact that we trust so many random people is mind-blowing to me, but we need trust in order to function. With that said, although I had no clue who Peter Kim was, I was super excited to come across his new book. And let me tell you, this book didn’t disappoint at all. Like me, Kim is fascinated by trust, but he’s actually been researching it for 20 years, and this book is a culmination of his work as well as a lot of extremely valuable lessons.

Not only does this book have a ton of interesting studies from Kim as well as other researchers, but it starts diving into what happens when we break a person’s trust. I was flabbergasted reading the experiments Kim has done on trust and how we do or don’t forgive. Kim makes it abundantly clear that as a whole, we’re terrible at giving people second chances, and our value systems and ideas of morality play a key role in this.

I’m one of the most skeptical people who doesn’t trust people easily, but I’m all about second chances. This book makes strong cases for why we need to offer people paths toward redemption or else we incentivize very poor behavior.

This is an amazing read, and I can’t wait to read it again in the future.

[AC (toknowthyshelf) · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thank you to the publishers, author, and NetGalley for the opportunity to read and review in exchange for a truthful review!

I admit, I read approximately 50% of this book. The concept is very interesting and I think the book in its entirety would be fully engaging for other social psychologists or individuals doing research in trust and related fields. Despite being a graduate student in clinical psychology with an interest in restorative justice and peace building, the structure of this book did not grab me. Perhaps that's my subjectively lower interest in social psychology (I kept wanting to think about the "case studies" presented in greater context, and felt that the variables assessed for did not adequately capture the nuances of history and culture). But there were also areas in the book I felt missed the mark, and attempted compassionate understanding of human nature while expressing the idea itself in a remarkably callous way. For example, the author discusses behavioral conditioning, a really important concept in understanding human behavior. He talks about how the salience of an issue depending on one's identity can impact one's decision to engage in opposition to a perceived conflict (such as resisting anti-abortion efforts, or resisting racist oppression). Then, he compares these experiences to one of Skinner's pigeons poking at a target due to operant conditioning. Similarly, he at times uses word choice which diminishes the lived experiences of non-male individuals, or individuals from different racial backgrounds, such saying that opposition to the lawyer involved in the Central Park Five case occurred during a "hypersensitive" time regarding race relations. Is the culture becoming hypersensitive? Or is the culture asking critical questions more loudly for the first time in a while?

Ultimately, if the narrative he tells about trust was engaging enough to me as a clinically-focused psychologist, I would have kept reading. Unfortunately, time is short, and I don't continue reading books if I am not caught in. I gave it a very good shot, however, by reading about half! This book may greatly interest social or I-O psychologists and students. However, it will not be ending up on my bookshelf.

[Karel Baloun · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dr. Peter Kim is a son of hard-working immigrants and represents the American dream. I hope his parents are proud of what he is achieved, because he is truly a good man doing work to make society better. This book is worthy of all of our time, because trust is everything, and we all depend on society for our own survival.

The last chapter "how we move forward" is so exceptional that it alone creates huge value from the book. "this requires that we move beyond our own interpretive bubbles to consider the broader range of ethical principles we all share... These efforts don't require us to abandon our views. They simply represent desire to learn more given that the information we have is almost always incomplete." (P204)

Steinbeck in East of Eden: "I am certain that underneath their top, most layers of frailty men want to be good and want to be loved. Indeed, most of their devices are attempted shortcuts to love." (p 202)

I do wish the book had been edited a bit more tightly, and not every story captured my attention. And the book did not successfully expound on its brief mention of the Trump phenomenon, and how he is basically a cancer eroding our trust within American society. Understanding that would have been astonishing, but I'll take his various circles of community analysis as a major step. I'm heartened that he actually documents with evidence that we have a biological bias towards increased trust and are best off forgiving easily.

[CM · Rating 5 out of 5]

I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in understanding trust in a meaningful way. It is packed with insights that are supported by evidence, it challenges us to take better stock of our assumptions, and it tackles some of the most daunting problems we face in our relationships and in the world. Those who appreciate what this book is trying to do and reflect on the content with an open mind will find themselves richly rewarded!

[E · Rating 1 out of 5]

Interesting concept - dry read. Written like a science paper - had to put down quickly.

[j :) · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow. Just, wow.

Reading Kim's book has made me think a bit more deeply about the way that I trust others. I never quite realized just how much simple trust I place in other people, from the person who repairs my phone when it's broken, to the cafe employee who hands me my coffee, I trust them to work in my best interest constantly. Kim's insight into this topic opened a whole new field of thought for me, and the analysis about the way that trust is so integral to so many parts of life, from job interviews to relationships, made for a read that was both mentally and psychologically deep.

The multitude of examples provided by Kim on the way that trust operates, with elaboration on certain subjects such as the justice system, gave me a perspective that I really value, and made this a good book to sit down and read when you are trying to be more mindful about the way you operate in the world. I highly recommend this read for anyone interested in a quick book to sit down and read about the way that people function, and leave the book feeling more knowledgeable and aware about the way you exist.

I do not believe any of my criticisms hold weight taking in the whole of the book. It is perfectly accustomed to its niche of psychologically inclined individuals, with precise and accurate examples and a variety of resources to create the best support for the thesis presented from chapter to chapter.

[kayu99 · Rating 5 out of 5]

I received a digital ARC from the publisher (Flatiron Books) through Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.

This book gives a good overview of the research and knowledge on trust: how it forms, how it is violated, and how it can be rebuilt. The selection of events that are used as examples to illustrate various points are well-chosen and relevant. The organization of the book is also helpful, with later chapters building on or referencing ideas introduced in previous ones. For some of the descriptions of experiments, I would have appreciated a diagram, table, or chart to depict the setups. I sometimes found it difficult to keep track of who was doing what in which experiment. I especially enjoyed the discussions of the importance of perceptions in trust violations, and the different factors that influence the reception an apology receives. I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in learning more about trust, people's perceptions of one another, and how to build connections.

[Sharyn Berg · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is truly a deep dive into all the whys, wherefores, and mechanics of what trust is and isn’t, in all its forms. It is written like a textbook, with many examples, tests, and studies, to prove its point. If this is what you’re searching for, then this is a book for you, an academic study into trust; however, if you were looking for a more relational book, such as learning how and when to give trust, and how to know if someone is trustworthy, and how to become more trustworthy yourself, then this isn’t what you are looking for at all. I find this book difficult to rate, because depending on what exactly you desire to get out of it, you could give it many or few stars. I will settle on 3 stars for lack of a better option. Thank you to NetGalley for the advance read copy.

[Trish Ryan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an interesting book that reads more like a dissertation than something you’d find on a bookstore shelf. The author covers a huge range of information, jumping from one example to the next in huge swaths of ideas. It was an interesting ride, but I was rarely sure exactly what point he was driving towards on any given page. I had hoped for a bit more that was applicable to daily individual life. But it’s interesting to consider his point that the very success of societies often hinges on how quickly trust is extended in everyday interactions. It’s worth the read for his musings on this point.

Thanks to NetGalley for providing a copy of this book.

[Jace · Rating 5 out of 5]

How Trust works by Peter H. Kim is an informative book about the science of trust.

Thoughts while reading:

-it's interesting how bad we are at judging who to trust and how to make ourselves trustworthy. We seem to make opposite assumptions when it comes to judging other people's competence versus their integrity, where one incident of competence would make people think that the person is capable, whereas one act of trustworthiness wouldn't necessarily make a person someone of high integrity
-I've also observed that people are initially very quick to trust others, rather than starting at a baseline of zero, but it was interesting to learn more about it and how quickly we make judgments. Furthermore, people that are more trusting tend to be happier and also perceived as more trustworthy
-it is both interesting and yet unsurprising that there's the idea of someone having a trustworthy face, though it's interesting that those with trustworthy faces tend to try to live up to that ideal
-I'm not surprised that the initial trust that we have for strangers can be very easily lost, but it was interesting to see how trusting people are of those close to them to the point of interpreting their behavior in a positive light so that they can maintain the relationship
-I had never really considered how apologies can differ depending on whether you make a competence violation or an integrity violation. When it comes to competence violations, it can be better to admit wrongdoing and apologize, but when it comes to integrity violations, it was fascinating that people are more forgiving if you deny your actions. It also seems to create a dilemma where if you commit an integrity violation, you can't really win if you apologize which can incentivize bad behavior. It's also funny that people think they want an apology but it doesn't improve the situation
-it's interesting that if you're trying to repair Trust, it doesn't necessarily matter what method you choose whether giving an apology or doing something more substantive like changing your actions, so long as the person receiving the apology perceives true repentance
-I was fascinated by the section that talked about how people sort of keep an internal moral bank account, where they can offset bad actions by recalling all the good they do. It's especially interesting because our internal perception of our deeds can vary from how people perceive our actions so that transgressions that we think are not a big deal, or transgressions that are offset by other good deeds, are not perceived by others. Instead, if we commit a transgression, others may feel betrayed and perceive our previous good deeds in a new light, perhaps thinking that that previous Behavior was manipulative or was setting the victim up, and while they may want reparations, it may take a great deal to repair that trust. It could change the perception of the person committing the deed all together
-it seems that this perception of how transgressions are interpreted also applies to groups, and in fact can be amplified by in group and out group thinking. When a group commits a transgression, they tend to blame the individual and distance themselves from it, whereas outsiders are more likely to blame the whole group. This is, however affected by whether one lives in an individualistic or collectivist culture
-I liked how the author addressed that people can have different values, but because they assume their values are the right ones, it must then follow that other people with differing values are wrong, when really, they just value different things.

When I initially picked up this book, I wasn't overly interested in the subject of trust, but some of the findings were unexpected and quite compelling. The case studies mention tend to be a lot of major contemporary issues one might have read in the news. I think I would have liked more stories about interpersonal struggles, rather than just stories about companies or politicians. Nevertheless, it was a very enjoyable and informative read. I give it a 4.5 out of 5

[Cody Allen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Trust is paramount for all successful and supportive human relationships. In love and in friendship, it is essential. In business, explicit contracts are often drafted so as to protect each party from violations of trust by the other despite the reality that the more trust there is without such binding contracts the better the relationship is for all parties. In politics, trust between the leaders and the people is necessary, and yet we seem to have less and less of it with each passing year. Our initial conclusion is obvious: the more trust we have with others, the better.

Through the research and writing of this book, our author shares that there are two main ways that we determine (and violate) trust in another: “competence, or the belief that someone possesses the technical and interpersonal skills that are required for a task,” and “integrity, or the belief that someone will adhere to a set of principles one finds acceptable.”

If a trust violation is one of competence, it can often be overcome, because while we need very little to establish that someone is competent, we are willing to “discount a single poor performance as a signal of incompetence, based on the assumption that even highly competent people can occasionally fall short of what they would normally be able to achieve.” If a trust violation is one of integrity, it is comparatively much harder to overcome because “we intuitively believe that those with high integrity would refrain from dishonest behavior in any situation, whereas those with low integrity will act either honestly or dishonestly depending on incentives.” Therefore, when we believe someone has acted dishonestly, we take it as “a reliable signal of low integrity, based on the assumption that only those with low integrity would ever act in dishonest ways.”

Let’s say we hire an accountant to do our taxes and they do a fine job three years in a row. Then, on the fourth year, we get a measly return, and after investigation determine that our accountant failed to understand a change in the tax code that should have benefitted us. This violation of trust can be easily forgiven by most people because the accountant has done good work in the past and simply made a mistake. We might not hire them next year, but we can forgive them for their lack of competence.

Alternatively, let’s say we discover that our spouse is cheating on us. This destroys our trust in the other, because we will now feel it necessary to re-examine many of their previous decisions and actions through a different lens. We may recalibrate our entire opinion of our spouse from a positive one to a negative one. We might choose to stay in the relationship, but this violation of trust is considerably harder to forgive.

With this in mind, when trust is broken, an important part of our response should include consideration of why the offense occurred. Is it a breach of competence or integrity? The answer can help guide us toward the path of reconciliation (or further separation).

The key to real trust is being willing to make ourselves vulnerable and is based on the belief that others won’t let us down, even though they could. We need to trust others and we need others to trust us because the more trust we have, the better our relationships will be. The relationships we share with others are one of the foundations of a good, happy, and prosperous life, which makes trust in others one of the highest virtues. We must always do our best to cultivate it responsibly.

[Jared Guertin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a pretty good book. I read it to support my psychotherapy practice, and there were some good chunks of information and wisdom I can use here. I thought it would be primarily helpful for work with couples, but this could be even better for parents and children.

The central thesis of the book was to distinguish between two types of trust breaches: those as matters of competence, and those as matters of integrity. Competence-based violations are ones where the violator made a mistake due to lack of knowledge, skill, etc., whereas integrity-based violations are ones where the violator did so based on values the perceiver believes to be wrong or immoral. Effective apologies vary based on the type of violation, and violations can be reframed to integrity- or competency-based and vice versa.

I understand that this book was multidisciplinary, including sociology, and as such had to rely on big-ticket scandals to show societal responses to various types of trust breach, but I would have loved it (at least for my purposes) if there had been more hypothetical or low-scale clinical case examples. I did find that the political scandals could get annoying (and in some cases lower my trust of the author) because there was sometimes such a clear expression of bias that I was unsure if the science being done around it was faulty. The author identifies as a centrist politically, but this seems at certain times to dispose a somewhat generous self-assessment of his own neutrality when in fact his presentation of some events feel skewed. Granted, in some situations, he does very generously and articulately present the viewpoints of people he disagrees with. But at other times, he explains to the reader that human moral assessment is often sweeping and one-sided, and then proceeds to make a sweeping and one-sided moral judgement a few pages later. Near the end the book states that some of that was for the purpose of filtering out readers who might be prone to abusing the Secrets At The End for personal gain, so that was a little weird. The secrets were just about how to apologize in a way that would help people regain your trust, so I guess that could be abused, but just a really weird way to gatekeep.

Nonetheless, most of the book was very nicely grounded in the science, and though I would have preferred less controversial case examples (although the book is about controversy in some sense), it was a very interesting read and would recommend to anyone looking to build communication skills, especially around apologizing.

[quasialidia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Contrary to the title, i think this book should have been about the fagility of trust. There are also many unfortunate but interesting subarguments Kim posits as true: total reconciliation and justice may be impossible, expectations of this are misleading; a return to trust cannot rely on justice alone, for there are many modalities of justice; moral realitivism is unavoidable and to blame for people's lack of trust and our inability to communicate about hiw best to repair trust, but yet people should be "good"; in some cases victims and their allies are to blame for trust not being repaired because they cannot accept that their truth is relative to their position, even though the offender is always to be blamed; lastly, its okay not to trust systems and people that have done wrong, however, we should be good people and try to move on slowly trying to listen and change the values of others.

Low rating is not just because of his argument or because he appears to be an apologist or neutral party in some abuse cases. The book is dry, 100 pages too long, and some analogies in places confuse the situation. The last chapter "How we move forward" really should frame the whole book and be the introduction and be echoed more in each chapter (it should be more a coherent argument then a linear laying of facts). Moreover, the studies he has done, on trust on an individual level, does not seem relevant to larger social issues. There is a huge jump from some empirical situations to broad moral philosophizing. How are lies on a resume compareable in scope to genocide and mass persecution by abstract social systems? How is my evaluating a person for cheating on a resume comparable to living next to a person that helped butcher my family (Rwanda example from text)? His solutions seem very inadequate to some of the topics he addresses such as genocide, racial tensions, rape culture, and 2SLGBTQI+ and trans persecution. Lastly, the pronouns of us/we/our is too US centric and again belies an apologic respect the status quo tone. I was left wondering who the audience is?

[Carin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Do you have trust issues in your life? It can be on a small scale–with a friend or family member–or large scale–do you work on a truth and reconciliation movement? This book covers it all. It starts with the individual and goes to the large-scale groups (Nazis, other war crimes trials, the aftermath of Apartheid, etc.) But really, most of us will be thinking of this in individual ways, and the underlying basic applies to both.

It boils down to this: whether or not an action is forgivable and trust can be rebuilt, depends very much on whether the action is perceived as having been cause by a lack of competence, or a lack of morals. And it’s perception that is key, which might not be accurate. But if we see someone as having done something wrong for the right reasons, that’s very forgivable. But if they did something wrong for personal gain or knowing full well it was wrong, that’s difficult. And the way people take accountability and apologize has implications for which of these motivations is attributed to them.

It’s not cut and dry of course. Dr. Kim and colleagues were able to devise several different experiments using the same action with slight tweaks, that very much affected how people viewed the perpetrator and the outcome, even though the action did not change. Which show how complicated trust can be.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars. It was fine. The first was FILLED with erudite language. I finally looked up what word would describe it, because it's a common problem of academic writers. They don't use jargon specific to their field (usually), but they write in a way that is just a little extra brain work to reason out their message. For example, Peter Kim said at one point non-close relationships. Nobody says 'non' anything in normal conversation. Just say Not close relationships or something. That's not that hard to see the difference, but when every sentence has at least two of these type then it makes for every sentence taking half a beat longer to figure out where you're supposed to go. When it is paragraph after paragraph of it it makes for a slog-fest and demotivating to continue when you're just wanting to casually assess the research findings.

Regardless of the language, the suggestions were fine, but not stated clearly enough to really make it the toolbox Kim suggested his book be. Had some good explanations, but not the smoothest of taking it in and applying it.

[Ashley · Rating 4 out of 5]

How Trust Works breaks trust down beyond honesty or reliability. More so, it’s about fulfilling the benefit of the doubt we’re given too soon, about strategy, and sometimes even survival.

Beware the Hivemind explores how groupthink shapes trust, showing how people instinctively defer to popular ideas and how groups are more critical of outsiders. The author’s personal anecdotes stand out, especially the story of discovering a racist clause in a contract—never removed simply because no one reads contracts. He’s one of the rare few who does, yet it was the welcome from his neighbors, not the outdated paperwork, that shaped his view of the community.

One of the most notable takeaways for me:
high-trust individuals aren’t naive or doomed to disaster—they’re often successful, intelligent, and happy, challenging the idea that extreme caution is the best form of protection.

Some parts lean clinical and drag, but the insights make up for it. Trust, when extended wisely, enriches life rather than exposing us. Worth the read.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

Professor of Management and Organization Peter H. Kim gives an overview of the latest research into the issue of trust between people. The points in this book are backed up with research projects and real world examples discussing trust, how it is formed, how it is broken, and how it can (or can't) be recovered. Perceptions can be as important as the reality in the area of trust and if we think a trust violation is one of competence or integrity can make a huge difference even if the violations are the same. Once trust is lost trust is usually hard to recover and we tend to remember the bad over the good when determining how much we trust others. I found the examples very interesting particularly how little differences in the situations made huge differences in the way trust was recovered or wasn't. I received a free ARC of this book from the publisher through the Goodreads First Reads giveaways. I would rate this book 3.5 stars if Goodreads allowed half stars.

[(a)lyss(a) · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received a copy of this book through NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.

This is a bit of a tricky book to rate, but it was interesting.

On the one hand it felt dense at times. It's packed with information including both academic information and anecdotes. But it also felt a little pop science-y at times and reminded me of a NPR podcast. This is really a book about how we form trust and what people generally find trustworthy, not about what it means to trust someone or become more trustworthy or anything like that. It's a book that seems to focus more on people as a group than what we as individuals do to learn, break, or repair trust.

[Beth Peninger]

United States Publication: August 15, 2023

Thank you to NetGalley and Flatiron Books for this advanced reader's copy. In exchange, I am providing an honest review.

I am positive this is a valuable resource/book to have and to read. But, after several tries and only getting to 19% and being unable to stay awake while reading it no matter what time of day it was, I decided to give up trying to get through it. Kim knows his stuff, however, the way he shares it in this title is a little verbose and a smidge too academic for a casual reader to pick up and read. Trust is such a timely and important topic that I wish it read more engaging and accessible to a wider audience.

[Lisa Konet · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a relevant and current book to anyone who has empathy and compassion for others. Trust is a very important and necessary concept and value to have. The different relationships and scenarios throughout the book are great examples why trust is such an imprtant value. Having trust and being trustworthy is so important for any person.

It was obvious reading this that the author did his research and presented his research sicinctly. I hope he writes more books like this in the future.

Recommended.

Thanks to NetGalley, Dr Kim and Flatiron Books for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.

Already available

[April · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am thankful for being approved to read this back in 2023 but I barely finished it now. I was not interested in reading the book when I picked it up, so I would put it back and try again a few times. I finally got through it now and only finished it because I hate leaving reviews incomplete. I was not a fan of this book, as I do not go into books looking to hear about politics. I can get into police issues, but I don't want to read about politics in a book about how trust works. I am certain Dr. Kim is very educated and knows this subject well, but this really was not my cup of tea.

[Louise Foerster · Rating 3 out of 5]

Peter Kim's HOW TRUST WORKS explores the possibilities of trust between us, whether broken or honored and held. While I enjoyed his discussion of an essential and important issue for all of us in this fractured time and reading the data and anecdotes shared to make his points, overall I was disappointed in learning nothing that I hadn't read before nor seen handled in other, more adept hands. I received a copy of this book and these opinions are my own, unbiased thoughts.

[Saraí · Rating 5 out of 5]

i received this complementary book from NetGalley & i’m very glad i did. the contents of the book challenged ways of thinking that i’ve taken for granted over the course of mi life. it was a dense read & it made me emotional on a number of occasions, but i pushed through. i now feel more confident & equipped as a community leader. i can only hope others are able to push through their own biases to enjoy this read as well.

[Katie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was an interesting read

[Roxann · Rating 2 out of 5]

Didn't actually say much

[Pat · Rating 3 out of 5]

it was okay - not exactly what i was expecting.

[Amanda · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a bad book, but there were a bunch of unrelated tangents that didn’t loop back. I feel like this was mis-titled or something. It was more on injustice and history.

[Tara]

Excellent! Do you have issues with trust? Head out and get this book; it gives you a lot of answers to issues. Thanks to Netgalley and Flatiron Books for this advanced reader copy. If you are wondering about relationships, trust, and repair, this will be the book.

[Ali Cat · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thank you for this book. The creation of trust is an important, fascinating topic, and I look forward to reading this deep exploration.

[Susan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thank you Netgalley for an advanced copy in return for an unbiased review

A comprehensive look at Trust. Why we trust; why we don't trust; how we can earn trust back; and when lying is ok because it doesn't matter. There are many examples of studies that were done to prove his assertions. Very good and thought provoking.


Thoughts while I am still reading
There is discussion about the different responses to the Tylenol vs. IRA bombing apologies
Tylenol did nothing wrong other than not anticipate that someone would tamper with their product to cause others harm. Their apology was acknowledging that the event happened and describing the steps they would do to prevent it from happening again. The IRA bombing was intentional, the apology was more of an excuse, and it didn't say they wouldn't do it again.

There is discussion on whether it is better to not apologize at all.