Retention · Empirical relational-exchange study

Consumer Trust, Value, and Loyalty in Relational Exchanges

Journal of Marketing · 2002

Deepak Sirdeshmukh, Jagdip Singh, Barry Sabol

Original paper ↗

Summary

Tests how trust and value operate in relational exchanges and bear on loyalty.

For your marketing

Possible founder application

Earn trust through dependable delivery, transparent limits, and customer-value proof before asking for expansion.

Reported result

What the study found

Tests how trust and value operate in relational exchanges and bear on loyalty.

Research question

What the authors investigated

How does the study’s stated design explain its reported outcome in this setting?

Design

Empirical relational-exchange study

Sample and setting

Relational service exchanges; abstract page

Scope and transfer

Limitations to keep in view

Abstract/page scope does not establish broader causal generalization.

Research sources

abstract_only

Study strength

3.5/5 Abstract-level evidence is useful for framing questions; verify full methods before transfer.

How this was assessed

The 1–5 evidence-check score is a practical reading aid, not a formal peer review or a probability that a conclusion is true. It combines design strength (2 points), sample reporting (1), comparison/control clarity (1), and how much of the paper could be checked (1). Access affects how confidently this directory can assess a study, not the study's underlying quality. Blinding is reported separately because it is not relevant to every design.

Design transparency · 2/2

Based on the reported study design in the retrieved source.

Sample and setting · 1/1

The sample context is stated; a numerical count is preserved only when reported.

Outcome clarity · 1/1

The finding is summarized from publisher or article metadata.

Access for checking · 0.5/1

Only abstract or bibliographic access was confirmed.

Double-blind? The retrieved publisher record does not establish whether participants or outcome assessors were blinded.