The Relationship Between Trust and Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1007/s10902-024-00737-8

Minxiang Zhao, Yixuan Li, Junqi Lin, Yuan Fang, Yuchuan Yang, Boyang Li, Yan Dong

{"title":"The Relationship Between Trust and Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Minxiang Zhao, Yixuan Li, Junqi Lin, Yuan Fang, Yuchuan Yang, Boyang Li, Yan Dong","doi":"10.1007/s10902-024-00737-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>An increasing number of studies emphasize that trust is most relevant to well-being. However, the results of this relationship remain inconclusive. This meta-analysis aims to synthesize the evidence on the association between trust and individual well-being. We searched several electronic databases to identify relevant studies published before September 30, 2022. Studies were included if they reported a Pearson’s correlation coefficient between trust and well-being. And a random-effects model was used. We identified 132 primary studies with a total of 1,060,174 participants. The results provided a moderate correlation between trust and well-being (<i>ρ</i> = 0.255) with 95% CI = [.240, .269]. Furthermore, we explored different trust types, well-being types, individualism, age, and gender as moderators. The results showed that the well-being types moderated the relationship between trust and well-being. Specifically, the strongest is social well-being, while the weakest is physical well-being. Trust types and individualism did not moderate the link between trust and well-being, whereas age and gender did. This study provides the evidence that trust plays an important role in promoting well-being.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00737-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

An increasing number of studies emphasize that trust is most relevant to well-being. However, the results of this relationship remain inconclusive. This meta-analysis aims to synthesize the evidence on the association between trust and individual well-being. We searched several electronic databases to identify relevant studies published before September 30, 2022. Studies were included if they reported a Pearson’s correlation coefficient between trust and well-being. And a random-effects model was used. We identified 132 primary studies with a total of 1,060,174 participants. The results provided a moderate correlation between trust and well-being (ρ = 0.255) with 95% CI = [.240, .269]. Furthermore, we explored different trust types, well-being types, individualism, age, and gender as moderators. The results showed that the well-being types moderated the relationship between trust and well-being. Specifically, the strongest is social well-being, while the weakest is physical well-being. Trust types and individualism did not moderate the link between trust and well-being, whereas age and gender did. This study provides the evidence that trust plays an important role in promoting well-being.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

信任与幸福之间的关系：元分析

越来越多的研究强调，信任与幸福感的关系最为密切。然而，关于这种关系的研究结果仍然没有定论。本荟萃分析旨在综合有关信任与个人幸福感之间关系的证据。我们检索了多个电子数据库，以确定 2022 年 9 月 30 日之前发表的相关研究。如果研究报告了信任与幸福感之间的皮尔逊相关系数，则将其纳入研究。并采用随机效应模型。我们确定了 132 项主要研究，共有 1,060,174 人参与。结果显示，信任与幸福感之间存在中度相关性（ρ = 0.255），95% CI = [.240, .269]。此外，我们还探讨了不同信任类型、幸福感类型、个人主义、年龄和性别的调节因素。结果显示，幸福感类型调节了信任与幸福感之间的关系。具体来说，社会幸福感最强，而身体幸福感最弱。信任类型和个人主义并不能调节信任与幸福感之间的关系，而年龄和性别则能。这项研究为信任在促进幸福感方面发挥重要作用提供了证据。

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

Journal of Happiness Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

6.50%

发文量

110

期刊介绍： The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?