EV-0006
Trustworthiness has three parts, and integrity is one of them
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734 · Source
What this entitles us to say
The dominant model of organizational trust separates the act of trusting from the qualities that warrant it, and decomposes trustworthiness into three perceived components — ability, benevolence and integrity.
What it found
Proposes that trust is the willingness to be vulnerable to another party, and that this willingness rests on perceived ability, benevolence and integrity — with the trustor's own propensity to trust as a further factor. It became the standard framework for the field.
Why it matters here
It is the academic version of the book's dyad. The framework pairs Trust with Trustworthy — extending trust, and being worth it — and this model formalises exactly that split, then names integrity as one of the three things that make a person worth trusting.
That also connects this dossier to the last one: on this model, Honesty/Integrity is not a neighboring trait to Trust. It is a component of it. Which is an argument for the Foundational family being genuinely one foundation rather than four adjacent items.
The limits
A theoretical model rather than an outcome study — cite it for the structure, not for effects. It is also a model of perceived trustworthiness, which is a judgment made by others and not something a person can assess about themselves with any reliability.
What we do not say
that this validates our assessment. It validates a distinction, not an instrument.