Are rules meant to be broken? The effects of rule-following and discretion on interpersonal trust

Although consistency and predictability have long been positioned as cornerstones of trust, the present research examines the benefits of inconsistency. Across one pilot study and two preregistered experiments we demonstrate that exercising discretion, rather than consistently following rules, can increase trust. We examine discretion in the context of punishment by studying perceptions of authority figures (e.g., police officers, managers) who either punish offenders according to prescribed rules (e.g., laws, policies) or who exercise discretion by occasionally deviating from rules. In Study 1 (N=347), we demonstrate that exercising discretion increases trust in the trust game. In Study 2 (N=814), we compare lenient discretion to punitive discretion. We find that people value discretion primarily because it signals compassion: lenient rule-breaking increases trust, but punitive rule-breaking does not. This research has important theoretical implications for the study of trust and important practical implications for the design and enforcement of punishment.