Measuring Trust: Experiments and Surveys in Contrast and Combination

Michael Naef, J. Schupp
{"title":"Measuring Trust: Experiments and Surveys in Contrast and Combination","authors":"Michael Naef, J. Schupp","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1367375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trust is a concept that has attracted - significant attention in economic theory and research within the last two decades: it has been applied in a number of contexts and has been investigated both as an explanatory and as a dependent variable. In this paper, we explore the questions of what exactly is measured by the diverse survey-derived scales and experiments claiming to measure trust, and how these different measures are related. Using nationally representative data, we test a commonly used experimental measure of trust for robustness to a number of interferences, finding it to be mostly unsusceptible to stake size, the extent of strategy space, the use of the strategy method, and the characteristics of the experimenters. Inspired by criticism of the widespread trust question used in many surveys, we created a new, improved survey trust scale consisting of three short statements. We show that the dimension of this scale is distinct from trust in institutions and trust in known others. Our new scale is a valid and reliable measure of trust in strangers. The scale is valid in the sense that it correlates with trusting behaviour in the experiment. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the test-retest reliability of six weeks is high. The experimental measure of trust is, on the other hand, not significantly correlated with trust in institutions nor with trust in known others. We therefore conclude that the experimental measure of trust refers not to trust in a general sense, but specifically to trust in strangers.","PeriodicalId":126614,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Experimental Studies (Topic)","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"220","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Experimental Studies (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1367375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 220

Abstract

Trust is a concept that has attracted - significant attention in economic theory and research within the last two decades: it has been applied in a number of contexts and has been investigated both as an explanatory and as a dependent variable. In this paper, we explore the questions of what exactly is measured by the diverse survey-derived scales and experiments claiming to measure trust, and how these different measures are related. Using nationally representative data, we test a commonly used experimental measure of trust for robustness to a number of interferences, finding it to be mostly unsusceptible to stake size, the extent of strategy space, the use of the strategy method, and the characteristics of the experimenters. Inspired by criticism of the widespread trust question used in many surveys, we created a new, improved survey trust scale consisting of three short statements. We show that the dimension of this scale is distinct from trust in institutions and trust in known others. Our new scale is a valid and reliable measure of trust in strangers. The scale is valid in the sense that it correlates with trusting behaviour in the experiment. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the test-retest reliability of six weeks is high. The experimental measure of trust is, on the other hand, not significantly correlated with trust in institutions nor with trust in known others. We therefore conclude that the experimental measure of trust refers not to trust in a general sense, but specifically to trust in strangers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
信任测量:对比与结合的实验与调查
在过去的二十年里,信任是一个在经济理论和研究中引起了极大关注的概念:它已被应用于许多背景下,并作为解释变量和因变量进行了研究。在本文中,我们探讨了不同的调查衍生的尺度和实验声称测量信任到底是什么,以及这些不同的测量是如何相关的问题。使用具有全国代表性的数据,我们测试了一种常用的信任实验测量方法对许多干扰的稳健性,发现它基本上不受股权规模、策略空间的程度、策略方法的使用和实验者的特征的影响。受到对许多调查中广泛使用的信任问题的批评的启发,我们创建了一个新的,改进的调查信任量表,由三个简短的陈述组成。我们表明,这个尺度的维度不同于对机构的信任和对已知他人的信任。我们的新量表是对陌生人信任的有效和可靠的衡量。量表是有效的,因为它与实验中的信任行为相关。此外,我们还证明了六周的重测信度很高。另一方面,信任的实验测量与对机构的信任或对已知他人的信任没有显著相关。因此,我们得出结论,信任的实验测量不是指一般意义上的信任,而是指对陌生人的信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Good Monitoring, Bad Monitoring Inflation Targeting Monetary and Fiscal Policies in a Two-Country Stock-Flow Consistent Model Voting on Punishment Systems within a Heterogeneous Group When Does Knowledge Become Intent?: Perceiving the Minds of Wrongdoers The Price Effects of Event Risk Protection: The Results from a Natural Experiment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1