首页 > 最新文献

Journal of Trust Research最新文献

英文 中文
Social trust during the pandemic: Longitudinal evidence from three waves of the Swiss household panel study 大流行病期间的社会信任:来自瑞士家庭面板研究三次波次的纵向证据
IF 1.9 Q3 MANAGEMENT Pub Date : 2024-08-09 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2024.2385534
Alexander Saaranen
{"title":"Social trust during the pandemic: Longitudinal evidence from three waves of the Swiss household panel study","authors":"Alexander Saaranen","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2024.2385534","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2024.2385534","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141921556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Integrating focal vulnerability into trust research 将重点脆弱性纳入信任研究
IF 1.9 Q3 MANAGEMENT Pub Date : 2024-07-22 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2024.2375802
Joseph A. Hamm, Guido Möllering, Kathleen Darcy
{"title":"Integrating focal vulnerability into trust research","authors":"Joseph A. Hamm, Guido Möllering, Kathleen Darcy","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2024.2375802","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2024.2375802","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141814637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Capturing the conversation of trust research 捕捉信任研究的对话
IF 1.4 Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2024-05-20 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2024.2331285
Joseph A. Hamm Editor in Chief, Lisa van der Werff Deputy Editor in Chief, Amanda Isabel Osuna Managing Editor, Kirsimarja Blomqvist Area Editor, Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill Area Editorial Fellow, Nicole Gillespie Area Editor, Ben Syed Area Editor, Edward C. Tomlinson Area Editor
Published in Journal of Trust Research (Vol. 14, No. 1, 2024)
发表于《信任研究期刊》(第 14 卷第 1 期,2024 年)
{"title":"Capturing the conversation of trust research","authors":"Joseph A. Hamm Editor in Chief, Lisa van der Werff Deputy Editor in Chief, Amanda Isabel Osuna Managing Editor, Kirsimarja Blomqvist Area Editor, Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill Area Editorial Fellow, Nicole Gillespie Area Editor, Ben Syed Area Editor, Edward C. Tomlinson Area Editor","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2024.2331285","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2024.2331285","url":null,"abstract":"Published in Journal of Trust Research (Vol. 14, No. 1, 2024)","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141151313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
On the intricate relationship between data and theory, and the potential gain afforded by capturing very low levels of media trust: Commentary on Mangold (2024) 数据与理论之间错综复杂的关系,以及捕捉极低水平的媒体信任所带来的潜在收益:评论 Mangold (2024)
IF 1.4 Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2024.2330889
Fanny Lalot, Rainer Greifeneder
In his paper ‘Improving media trust research through better measurement: An item response theory perspective', Frank Mangold (2024) adopts an item response theory approach to rethink and reconceptu...
弗兰克-曼戈尔德(Frank Mangold)(2024 年)在其论文《通过更好的测量改进媒体信任研究:弗兰克-曼戈尔德(Frank Mangold)(2024年)在他的论文《通过更好的测量改进媒体信任研究:项目反应理论视角》中,采用项目反应理论的方法重新思考和概念化了媒体信任研究。
{"title":"On the intricate relationship between data and theory, and the potential gain afforded by capturing very low levels of media trust: Commentary on Mangold (2024)","authors":"Fanny Lalot, Rainer Greifeneder","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2024.2330889","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2024.2330889","url":null,"abstract":"In his paper ‘Improving media trust research through better measurement: An item response theory perspective', Frank Mangold (2024) adopts an item response theory approach to rethink and reconceptu...","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140609122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Is security still the chiefest enemy? The challenges and contradictions in European confidence- and security-building in the Cold War 安全仍是最大的敌人吗?冷战时期欧洲建立信任与安全的挑战与矛盾
IF 1.4 Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2024.2319667
Thomas Hughes
The regime of Confidence- (and Security-) Building Measures (C(S)BMs) represented an effort to re-imagine Arms Control in Europe and reduce the possibility of unwanted escalation due to misundersta...
建立信任(和安全)措施(C(S)BMs)制度代表着一种努力,旨在重新构想欧洲的军备控制,并减少由于误解而导致不必要升级的可能性。
{"title":"Is security still the chiefest enemy? The challenges and contradictions in European confidence- and security-building in the Cold War","authors":"Thomas Hughes","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2024.2319667","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2024.2319667","url":null,"abstract":"The regime of Confidence- (and Security-) Building Measures (C(S)BMs) represented an effort to re-imagine Arms Control in Europe and reduce the possibility of unwanted escalation due to misundersta...","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140018733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Police legitimacy in the making: the underlying social forces for police legitimacy among religious communities 警察合法性的形成:宗教团体中警察合法性的潜在社会力量
IF 1.4 Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2024-02-15 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2024.2302160
Dikla Yogev
Literature focusing on race and policing has consistently reported a decline in recent years in police legitimacy among minority communities. Yet, the effect of religion on policing has not receive...
有关种族和警务的文献一直报告称,近年来少数族裔社区的警察合法性有所下降。然而,宗教对警务工作的影响并没有得到...
{"title":"Police legitimacy in the making: the underlying social forces for police legitimacy among religious communities","authors":"Dikla Yogev","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2024.2302160","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2024.2302160","url":null,"abstract":"Literature focusing on race and policing has consistently reported a decline in recent years in police legitimacy among minority communities. Yet, the effect of religion on policing has not receive...","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139755083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Conspiracy mentality differently shapes interpersonal trust when money or digital privacy is at stake 当金钱或数字隐私受到威胁时,阴谋心态会以不同的方式塑造人际信任
Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2023.2248083
Michael Schepisi, Biljana Gjoneska, Silvia Mari, Maria Serena Panasiti, Giuseppina Porciello, Roland Imhoff
ABSTRACTTo believe in conspiracy theories is to suspect that (powerful) others are plotting behind one’s back. Conspiracy beliefs might be therefore an issue of (dis)trust. In this study, we sought to explore whether this association is modulated by the way trust is operationalised and by the specific target to whom trust is directed. In doing so, we used two proxies of trust: (i) money investment within a hypothetical version of the trust game and (ii) the likelihood of disclosing a personal digital information (i.e. password). Then we presented participants with a set of trustees representing different social categories and having different degrees of closeness to the participants. Our results showed that when trust was expressed as money investment, higher levels of conspiracy mentality were associated to less trust towards powerful categories, such as ingroup politicians, scientists, public organisations, pharmaceutical and textile CEOs. Conversely, when trust was expressed as the likelihood of disclosing one’s own password, this association was observed only when the trustee was an ingroup politician. Here, we demonstrated that the negative association between conspiracy mentality and trust is not a uniform phenomenon, rather is subject to the expression of trust and to its specific targets.KEYWORDS: Conspiracy mentalityinterpersonal trustdigital securitymonetary investmentpolitical intergroup bias AckowledgementsWe thank the EU COST Network on ‘Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories' (COMPACT Action) for inspiring this work. We thank Ambra Saraceno for her suggestions on the measures employed in this work.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Authors contributionMichael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti and Silvia Mari contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti and Silvia Mari. Analyses were performed by Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello and Maria Serena Panasiti. Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti and Biljana Gjoneska interpreted the results. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Michael Schepisi. Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti, Silvia Mari, Biljana Gjoneska and Roland Imhoff revised previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.Ethics approvalAs part of a large international project, the present study falls under a cluster of ethics approvals of studies on conspiracy theories, secured by one of the leading institutions in the project. The present research was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.ConsentParticipants completed the survey on voluntary basis and give their informed consent to participate in the study.Data availability statementDataset and script for the analyses of the present study are available in Mendeley rep
【摘要】相信阴谋论就是怀疑(有权势的)其他人在背后密谋。因此,阴谋论可能是一个(不信任)问题。在本研究中,我们试图探索这种关联是否受到信任运作方式和信任所指向的特定目标的调节。在此过程中,我们使用了两种信任代理:(i)在假设版本的信任游戏中进行资金投资;(ii)披露个人数字信息(即密码)的可能性。然后,我们向参与者展示了一组代表不同社会类别的受托人,他们与参与者的亲密程度不同。我们的研究结果表明,当信任表现为金钱投资时,阴谋心理的水平越高,对权力类别的信任就越低,比如团体政治家、科学家、公共组织、制药和纺织公司的首席执行官。相反,当信任被表示为泄露自己密码的可能性时,只有当受托人是内部政治人物时,这种联系才会出现。在这里,我们证明了阴谋心理与信任之间的负相关不是一个统一的现象,而是受信任的表达和具体目标的影响。关键词:阴谋心态人际信任数字安全货币投资政治群体间偏见我们感谢欧盟成本网络的“阴谋理论比较分析”(COMPACT Action)对这项工作的启发。我们感谢Ambra Saraceno就这项工作中采用的措施提出的建议。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti和Silvia Mari对研究的概念和设计做出了贡献。材料准备和数据收集由Michael Schepisi、Giuseppina Porciello、Maria Serena Panasiti和Silvia Mari完成。Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello和Maria Serena Panasiti进行了分析。Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti和Biljana Gjoneska解释了结果。手稿的初稿是由Michael Schepisi撰写的。Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti, Silvia Mari, Biljana Gjoneska和Roland Imhoff修改了以前的手稿版本。所有作者都阅读并批准了最终的手稿。伦理批准作为一个大型国际项目的一部分,本研究属于阴谋论研究的一系列伦理批准,由该项目的一个主要机构保证。本研究是根据1964年《赫尔辛基宣言》进行的。参与者在自愿的基础上完成调查,并给予他们参与研究的知情同意。数据可用性声明本研究分析的数据集和脚本可在Mendeley知识库中获得,链接如下:https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/fxn3zwd4vp/1.Additional informationfunding本研究由米兰比可卡大学2017-ATE-0007基金部分支持。作者简介michael Schepisi(博士)目前是维罗纳大学人文科学系的博士后研究员。他在罗马大学(Sapienza University of Rome)获得博士学位,论文主题是政治意识形态在社会认知中的作用,特别关注偏见和道德决策。他的研究兴趣包括群体间偏见的神经-心理-社会决定因素的研究。Biljana Gjoneska(医学博士)是马其顿科学与艺术学院(MK)的终身研究员。她的工作包括对群体行为和网络相关行为的跨文化调查,涉及社会心理方面(如阴谋论、不信任和错误信息的在线传播)和健康问题(即各种形式的网络成瘾)。她是心理科学加速器(PSA)伦理委员会的助理主任,几个欧盟成本行动的管理委员会成员,以及几个行为科学国际合作的国家代表。西尔维娅·马里(博士)是米兰-比可卡大学的副教授。她是心理学系心理学本科课程的协调员。她的研究兴趣包括态度和信仰的决定因素,包括阴谋思维及其行为后果,应用于政治心理学、健康心理学和群体间关系等各个领域。她是国际科学学会的成员,包括ISPP和EASP,以及许多合作研究网络的成员。 Maria Serena Panasiti是罗马萨皮恩扎大学心理学系临床心理学副教授。她对临床和健康人群的社会认知研究感兴趣。她的主要研究课题是(受损)内感受或情绪处理对社会/道德决策的影响。Giuseppina Porciello(博士)是罗马萨皮恩扎大学心理学系的非终身教授。她还在罗马的AgliotiLAB和圣卢西亚医院担任临床研究员。她的研究主要围绕身体信号在一个人对自己身体的意识中的作用以及它们对高阶认知、情感和社会过程的影响。她还研究了群体内和群体外过程的行为和生理方面,特别关注种族和政治意识形态。她是意大利心理学会(AIP)和意大利心理生理学和认知神经科学学会(SIPF)的成员。罗兰·伊姆霍夫(Roland Imhoff)是美因茨约翰内-古腾堡大学社会和法律心理学教授。他的部分研究集中在政治行为和态度的社会认知基础上,强调阴谋心态是一种普遍的世界观。他是“德国心理学会”阴谋论特别工作组的成员,也是EASP执行委员会的成员。
{"title":"Conspiracy mentality differently shapes interpersonal trust when money or digital privacy is at stake","authors":"Michael Schepisi, Biljana Gjoneska, Silvia Mari, Maria Serena Panasiti, Giuseppina Porciello, Roland Imhoff","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2023.2248083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2023.2248083","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTTo believe in conspiracy theories is to suspect that (powerful) others are plotting behind one’s back. Conspiracy beliefs might be therefore an issue of (dis)trust. In this study, we sought to explore whether this association is modulated by the way trust is operationalised and by the specific target to whom trust is directed. In doing so, we used two proxies of trust: (i) money investment within a hypothetical version of the trust game and (ii) the likelihood of disclosing a personal digital information (i.e. password). Then we presented participants with a set of trustees representing different social categories and having different degrees of closeness to the participants. Our results showed that when trust was expressed as money investment, higher levels of conspiracy mentality were associated to less trust towards powerful categories, such as ingroup politicians, scientists, public organisations, pharmaceutical and textile CEOs. Conversely, when trust was expressed as the likelihood of disclosing one’s own password, this association was observed only when the trustee was an ingroup politician. Here, we demonstrated that the negative association between conspiracy mentality and trust is not a uniform phenomenon, rather is subject to the expression of trust and to its specific targets.KEYWORDS: Conspiracy mentalityinterpersonal trustdigital securitymonetary investmentpolitical intergroup bias AckowledgementsWe thank the EU COST Network on ‘Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories' (COMPACT Action) for inspiring this work. We thank Ambra Saraceno for her suggestions on the measures employed in this work.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Authors contributionMichael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti and Silvia Mari contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti and Silvia Mari. Analyses were performed by Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello and Maria Serena Panasiti. Michael Schepisi, Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti and Biljana Gjoneska interpreted the results. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Michael Schepisi. Giuseppina Porciello, Maria Serena Panasiti, Silvia Mari, Biljana Gjoneska and Roland Imhoff revised previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.Ethics approvalAs part of a large international project, the present study falls under a cluster of ethics approvals of studies on conspiracy theories, secured by one of the leading institutions in the project. The present research was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.ConsentParticipants completed the survey on voluntary basis and give their informed consent to participate in the study.Data availability statementDataset and script for the analyses of the present study are available in Mendeley rep","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136060485","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Improving media trust research through better measurement: An item response theory perspective 通过更好的测量改进媒体信任研究:项目反应理论视角
IF 1.4 Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2023-07-26 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2023.2229791
F. Mangold
{"title":"Improving media trust research through better measurement: An item response theory perspective","authors":"F. Mangold","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2023.2229791","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2023.2229791","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47663243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Inviting submissions to the Special Issue on trust and vulnerability (Deadline 31 August 2024) 邀请提交关于信任和脆弱性的特刊(截止日期2024年8月31日)
IF 1.4 Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2023.2246837
Simon Schafheitle, Antoinette Weibel, Guido Möllering
Trust implies vulnerability, as stated by various scholars across disciplines (Baier, 1986; Bigley & Pearce, 1998; Lewis & Weigert, 1985). Some of the most cited definitions (e.g. Mayer et al. (1995) and Rousseau et al., 1998) contain the crucial idea that the essence of trust is an acceptance of vulnerability based on positive expectations. As Bigley and Pearce (1998, p. 407), reviewing earlier work, observe: ‘When the terms “trust” and “distrust” have been evoked in the social sciences, they almost always have been associated with the idea of actor vulnerability.’ Scholars in other disciplines such as philosophy (e.g. Baghramian et al., 2020), economics (e.g. James, 2002), education (e.g. Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 1998), medicine (Barnard, 2016), and theology (Bruni, 2021) also define trust in the light of vulnerability. Finally, behavioural conceptualizations of trust imply risk-taking and thereby incurring vulnerability, as trusting might not be reciprocated or even allows the other party to do harm (Dasgupta, 1988; Luhmann, 1979). While vulnerability is recognised as a conceptual cornerstone in trust research, few authors delve into detailed explanations of how they specifically utilise and qualify the concept. To further complicate, fundamental controversies concerning vulnerability in trust research remain unresolved. Some researchers, for instance, view vulnerability as a deliberate decision influenced by factors like perceived trustworthiness (e.g. Mayer et al., 1995), while others, following Deutsch (1958), see vulnerability as an existential awareness of the inherent risks in relationships, which is essential for the subsequent development of trust. In this vein, the acknowledgment of ‘being at somebody’s mercy’ is a prerequisite for trust to emerge. Hence, whether we perceive vulnerability as an existential condition or as a deliberate state, its relationship with trust—whether it precedes or follows trust—should significantly influence the way we advocate for trust, model it, and measure it. However, this matter has received limited attention. With our fundamental criticism, we of course acknowledge the few notable exceptions. For instance, Misztal (2011) examines vulnerability as both a condition and outcome for trust proposing three types of vulnerability. Nienaber et al. (2015) distinguish between active vulnerability and passive vulnerability, and Weibel et al. (2023) explore vulnerability as a condition for trust and differentiate various types of active trusting based on the specific vulnerability involved. While these studies offer valuable insights, much of the existing trust research tends to be superficial in qualifying vulnerability, and at worst, it opens itself to fundamental critique. It begs the question: What is the value of trust research if it fails to address the core underlying issue of vulnerability with greater precision and depth? In addition to lacking more sophisticated conceptualizations, mainstream trust resea
正如不同学科的学者所说,信任意味着脆弱性(Baier,1986;Bigley和Pearce,1998;Lewis和Weigert,1985)。一些被引用最多的定义(例如Mayer等人(1995)和Rousseau等人,1998)包含了一个关键的观点,即信任的本质是基于积极期望接受脆弱性。正如Bigley和Pearce(1998,第407页)在回顾早期工作时所观察到的那样:“当“信任”和“不信任”这两个术语在社会科学中被提及时,它们几乎总是与行为者脆弱性的概念联系在一起。”哲学(例如Baghramian等人,2020)、经济学(例如James,2002)、教育(例如Tschannen-Moran&Hoy,1998)、医学(Barnard,2016)和神学(Bruni,2021)等其他学科的学者也根据脆弱性来定义信任。最后,信任的行为概念意味着冒险,从而导致脆弱性,因为信任可能不会得到回报,甚至会让另一方造成伤害(Dasgupta,1988;卢曼,1979年)。虽然脆弱性被公认为信任研究的概念基石,但很少有作者深入研究如何具体利用和限定这一概念的详细解释。更为复杂的是,关于信任研究中脆弱性的根本争议仍未解决。例如,一些研究人员将脆弱性视为一种受感知可信度等因素影响的深思熟虑的决定(例如Mayer等人,1995),而另一些研究人员则在Deutsch(1958)之后,将脆弱性看作是对关系中固有风险的存在意识,这对随后的信任发展至关重要。在这种情况下,承认“任由他人摆布”是信任产生的先决条件。因此,无论我们将脆弱性视为一种生存状态还是一种蓄意状态,它与信任的关系——无论是在信任之前还是之后——都应该对我们倡导信任、建模和衡量信任的方式产生重大影响。然而,这件事受到的关注有限。对于我们的基本批评,我们当然承认少数几个明显的例外。例如,Misztal(2011)将脆弱性视为信任的条件和结果,提出了三种类型的脆弱性。Nienaber等人(2015)区分了主动脆弱性和被动脆弱性,Weibel等人(2023)探讨了脆弱性作为信任的条件,并根据所涉及的特定脆弱性区分了各种类型的主动信任。虽然这些研究提供了有价值的见解,但现有的许多信任研究在限定脆弱性方面往往是肤浅的,最坏的情况是,它会受到根本性的批评。这引出了一个问题:如果信任研究不能更准确、更深入地解决脆弱性这一核心根本问题,那么它的价值是什么?除了缺乏更复杂的概念外,主流信任研究还没有很好地解决脆弱性的经验经验,以及个人如何在信任的背景下成功或失败接受脆弱性。只有少数研究专门研究了在实际环境中对脆弱性和关系风险的感知和管理(Searle等人,2016;Siegrist,2021;Tsui Auch和Möllering,2010年)。整合信托研究中经常被忽视的领域的见解将提供急需的额外理解。例如,心理动力学通过丰富的现象学研究提供了对脆弱性、发展和信任的全面探索(例如,Corlett等人,2021)。此外
{"title":"Inviting submissions to the Special Issue on trust and vulnerability (Deadline 31 August 2024)","authors":"Simon Schafheitle, Antoinette Weibel, Guido Möllering","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2023.2246837","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2023.2246837","url":null,"abstract":"Trust implies vulnerability, as stated by various scholars across disciplines (Baier, 1986; Bigley & Pearce, 1998; Lewis & Weigert, 1985). Some of the most cited definitions (e.g. Mayer et al. (1995) and Rousseau et al., 1998) contain the crucial idea that the essence of trust is an acceptance of vulnerability based on positive expectations. As Bigley and Pearce (1998, p. 407), reviewing earlier work, observe: ‘When the terms “trust” and “distrust” have been evoked in the social sciences, they almost always have been associated with the idea of actor vulnerability.’ Scholars in other disciplines such as philosophy (e.g. Baghramian et al., 2020), economics (e.g. James, 2002), education (e.g. Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 1998), medicine (Barnard, 2016), and theology (Bruni, 2021) also define trust in the light of vulnerability. Finally, behavioural conceptualizations of trust imply risk-taking and thereby incurring vulnerability, as trusting might not be reciprocated or even allows the other party to do harm (Dasgupta, 1988; Luhmann, 1979). While vulnerability is recognised as a conceptual cornerstone in trust research, few authors delve into detailed explanations of how they specifically utilise and qualify the concept. To further complicate, fundamental controversies concerning vulnerability in trust research remain unresolved. Some researchers, for instance, view vulnerability as a deliberate decision influenced by factors like perceived trustworthiness (e.g. Mayer et al., 1995), while others, following Deutsch (1958), see vulnerability as an existential awareness of the inherent risks in relationships, which is essential for the subsequent development of trust. In this vein, the acknowledgment of ‘being at somebody’s mercy’ is a prerequisite for trust to emerge. Hence, whether we perceive vulnerability as an existential condition or as a deliberate state, its relationship with trust—whether it precedes or follows trust—should significantly influence the way we advocate for trust, model it, and measure it. However, this matter has received limited attention. With our fundamental criticism, we of course acknowledge the few notable exceptions. For instance, Misztal (2011) examines vulnerability as both a condition and outcome for trust proposing three types of vulnerability. Nienaber et al. (2015) distinguish between active vulnerability and passive vulnerability, and Weibel et al. (2023) explore vulnerability as a condition for trust and differentiate various types of active trusting based on the specific vulnerability involved. While these studies offer valuable insights, much of the existing trust research tends to be superficial in qualifying vulnerability, and at worst, it opens itself to fundamental critique. It begs the question: What is the value of trust research if it fails to address the core underlying issue of vulnerability with greater precision and depth? In addition to lacking more sophisticated conceptualizations, mainstream trust resea","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49113411","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Impact and (the Journal of) Trust Research 《影响与信任研究》杂志
IF 1.4 Q2 Psychology Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2023.2246836
Guido Möllering, Joseph A. Hamm
{"title":"Impact and (the Journal of) Trust Research","authors":"Guido Möllering, Joseph A. Hamm","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2023.2246836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2023.2246836","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43518765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Journal of Trust Research
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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