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

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Authors

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.
Original languageEnglish
JournalAmerican Sociological Review
Volume76
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)786-807
Number of pages22
ISSN0003-1224
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01.10.2011

DOI

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Improved dam operation in the Amu Darya river basin including transboundary aspects
  2. Capability of social life cycle assessment for analyzing the artisanal small-scale gold mining sector—case study in the Amazonian rainforest in Brazil
  3. Kunsten og 11. september 2001
  4. Minor keywords of political theory
  5. The Future of Provenance: Digital Cataloguing as Reparative Practice
  6. Perceptions of nature and its non-material contributions to people at Mount Kilimanjaro
  7. Miscellaneous Articles
  8. "How Bad Was He? Let Me Count the Ways"
  9. Evidence-based policy-making?
  10. European railway deregulation
  11. Development of a Sustainability Balanced Scorecard
  12. The Challenges of Gamifying Sustainability Communication.
  13. Modeling risk contagion in the Italian zonal electricity market
  14. Normative Orientierungen
  15. Embedding
  16. Flexibility, dual labour markets, and temporary employment – Empirical evidence from German establishment data
  17. Choreographen der Gewalt
  18. Cutting Across Lines: Lil Picard and the Reorienting Effects of Collage
  19. Mit Steckwürfel und Geobrett
  20. THE POLITICS OF SMELL AND THE MORALITY OF SIGHT
  21. Chemistry of POPs in the Atmosphere
  22. Does cognitive behaviour therapy have an enduring effect that is superior to keeping patients on continuation pharmacotherapy?
  23. Economic analysis of trade-offs between justices
  24. Integration von Gender-Aspekten in gestufte Jahrgänge - eine Handreichung
  25. Updating inflation expectations
  26. Business Trips. Features, Occasions, Effects
  27. Judgement Practices in the Artistic Field
  28. Less Populist in Power Online Communication of Populist Parties in Coalition Governments
  29. Regulating Exceptions for Research and Exploratory Fishing in Southern Ocean Marine Protected Areas
  30. Institutional rearrangements in the north Luangwa ecosystem
  31. Determination of pesticide fluxes in beech forests
  32. Validation of the COVID-19 Digital Health Literacy Instrument in the Italian Language
  33. In Situ Synchrotron Radiation Study of the Tension–Compression Asymmetry in an Extruded Mg–2Y–1Zn–1Mn Alloy
  34. Wie gehe ich mit schwierigen Schülern um?