How General is Trust in "Most People" ? Solving the Radius of Trust Problem

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Standard

How General is Trust in "Most People" ? Solving the Radius of Trust Problem. / Delhey, Jan; Newton, Kenneth; Welzel, Christian.
in: American Sociological Review, Jahrgang 76, Nr. 5, 01.10.2011, S. 786-807.

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Delhey J, Newton K, Welzel C. How General is Trust in "Most People" ? Solving the Radius of Trust Problem. American Sociological Review. 2011 Okt 1;76(5):786-807. doi: 10.1177/0003122411420817

Bibtex

@article{8631b5f5ef9f4c17a78de437e33122d8,
title = "How General is Trust in {"}Most People{"} ?: Solving the Radius of Trust Problem",
abstract = "Generalized trust has become a paramount topic throughout the social sciences, in its own right and as the key civic component of social capital. To date, cross-national research relies on the standard question: {"}Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people?{"} Yet the radius problem-that is, how wide a circle of others respondents imagine as {"}most people{"}-makes comparisons between individuals and countries problematic. Until now, much about the radius problem has been speculation, but data for 51 countries from the latest World Values Survey make it possible to estimate how wide the trust radius actually is. We do this by relating responses to the standard trust question to a new battery of items that measures in-group and out-group trust. In 41 out of 51 countries, {"}most people{"} in the standard question predominantly connotes out-groups. To this extent, it is a valid measure of general trust in others. Nevertheless, the radius of {"}most people{"} varies considerably across countries; it is substantially narrower in Confucian countries and wider in wealthy countries. Some country rankings on trust thus change dramatically when the standard question is replaced by a radius-adjusted trust score. In cross-country regressions, the radius of trust matters for civic attitudes and behaviors because the assumed civic nature of trust depends on a wide radius.",
keywords = "Politics, civicness, general trust, in-group/out-group trust, social capital, trust radius, Gender and Diversity",
author = "Jan Delhey and Kenneth Newton and Christian Welzel",
year = "2011",
month = oct,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0003122411420817",
language = "English",
volume = "76",
pages = "786--807",
journal = "American Sociological Review",
issn = "0003-1224",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "5",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - How General is Trust in "Most People" ?

T2 - Solving the Radius of Trust Problem

AU - Delhey, Jan

AU - Newton, Kenneth

AU - Welzel, Christian

PY - 2011/10/1

Y1 - 2011/10/1

N2 - Generalized trust has become a paramount topic throughout the social sciences, in its own right and as the key civic component of social capital. To date, cross-national research relies on the standard question: "Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people?" Yet the radius problem-that is, how wide a circle of others respondents imagine as "most people"-makes comparisons between individuals and countries problematic. Until now, much about the radius problem has been speculation, but data for 51 countries from the latest World Values Survey make it possible to estimate how wide the trust radius actually is. We do this by relating responses to the standard trust question to a new battery of items that measures in-group and out-group trust. In 41 out of 51 countries, "most people" in the standard question predominantly connotes out-groups. To this extent, it is a valid measure of general trust in others. Nevertheless, the radius of "most people" varies considerably across countries; it is substantially narrower in Confucian countries and wider in wealthy countries. Some country rankings on trust thus change dramatically when the standard question is replaced by a radius-adjusted trust score. In cross-country regressions, the radius of trust matters for civic attitudes and behaviors because the assumed civic nature of trust depends on a wide radius.

AB - Generalized trust has become a paramount topic throughout the social sciences, in its own right and as the key civic component of social capital. To date, cross-national research relies on the standard question: "Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people?" Yet the radius problem-that is, how wide a circle of others respondents imagine as "most people"-makes comparisons between individuals and countries problematic. Until now, much about the radius problem has been speculation, but data for 51 countries from the latest World Values Survey make it possible to estimate how wide the trust radius actually is. We do this by relating responses to the standard trust question to a new battery of items that measures in-group and out-group trust. In 41 out of 51 countries, "most people" in the standard question predominantly connotes out-groups. To this extent, it is a valid measure of general trust in others. Nevertheless, the radius of "most people" varies considerably across countries; it is substantially narrower in Confucian countries and wider in wealthy countries. Some country rankings on trust thus change dramatically when the standard question is replaced by a radius-adjusted trust score. In cross-country regressions, the radius of trust matters for civic attitudes and behaviors because the assumed civic nature of trust depends on a wide radius.

KW - Politics

KW - civicness

KW - general trust

KW - in-group/out-group trust

KW - social capital

KW - trust radius

KW - Gender and Diversity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992258618&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0003122411420817

DO - 10.1177/0003122411420817

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 76

SP - 786

EP - 807

JO - American Sociological Review

JF - American Sociological Review

SN - 0003-1224

IS - 5

ER -

DOI