Gen(d)eralized Trust: Women, Work, and Trust in Strangers

Mewes, Jan

doi:10.1093/esr/jcu049

Cited by 34 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As discussed by Stolle (1998), education mitigates scepticism and enhances tolerance. Overall, the findings presented here are similar to those at the European level (Charron & Rothstein, 2016;Mewes, 2014). Voluntary associations, education, and confidence in welfare and law enforcement institutions have a positive association with generalized trust.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 83%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Vol 9 No 2 (2019)

No¹

2019

P&P

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper outlines a neo-Weberian approach to state-sponsored social closure in professional formation. Despite its advantages, state decision-making is not typically well-defined or examined in neo-Weberian analyses. Neo-Weberianism is differentiated from Max Weber's own work on social action and rationality, which generally provides a more subtle interpretation of state socio-political processes. The paper explores how policy formation can be more incisively analyzed inside the black box of state decision-making from a Weberian perspective. This is exemplified by the passage of the 1858 Medical Act in the United Kingdom establishing the statesupported medical profession. While further work is necessary in filling in the black box, this paper charts an important future path for neo-Weberian analyses of professions, and their relationship with the state.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 83%

“…In the European context demographic factors correlate with generalized trust (Mewes, 2014). Experimental studies also show that individuals from different backgrounds and ethnicities have different trust propensities; however, these are also contextual (Ostrom & Walker, 2003).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vol 9 No 2 (2019)

No¹

2019

P&P

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This question has received some criticism (Miller and Mitamura, 2003;Nannestad, 2008;Sturgis and Smith, 2010), but it is the only question for which data are available across time both in national survey and in international surveys and has been widely used in recent studies (e.g. Delhey, Newton and Welzel, 2011;Sønderskov, 2011;Traunmü ller, 2011;Dinesen, 2013;Mewes, 2014). Refraining from its use would mean to discard data from numerous surveys such as the panel survey investigated here.…”

Section: Data Measures and Controlsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negative Experiences and Trust: A Causal Analysis of the Effects of Victimization on Generalized Trust

Bauer

2014

Eur Sociol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generalized trust is praised by many researchers as the foundation of functioning social systems. An ongoing debate concerns the question whether and to what extent experiences impact individuals' generalized trust, as measured with the standard trust survey question. So far, reliable empirical evidence regarding the causal effect of experiences on generalized trust is scarce. Studies either do not directly measure the quality of experiences or use designs that are prone to selection bias. In the present study, we investigate a unique panel data set from Switzerland that contains measures of trust and measures of negative experiences, i.e. victimization. We use change score analysis and 'genetic matching' to investigate the causal effect of victimization on generalized trust and find no substantially strong effect that is consistent across panel data waves.

show abstract

“…It has been well-established that on average immigrants tend to trust generalized others less than the native born (see Bilodeau and Nevitte, 2003;Kazemipur, 2006;Nakhaie, 2008;Stolle et al, 2008;Doerschler and Jackson, 2012;Hwang, 2013;Nakhaie and de Lint, 2013). This finding holds in Canada (Baer et al, 1993;Hwang, 2013), Europe (Kotzian, 2011;Mewes, 2014) and for some groups in the United States (Uslaner, 2008). In the case of particularized social trust, in-group members tend to trust their own group members more than out-group members (Uslaner, 2017).…”

Section: Immigration and Trustmentioning

confidence: 97%

Immigration, Discrimination, and Trust: A Simply Complex Relationship

Wilkes

2019

Front. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many immigrants experience discrimination. In this paper we consider how discrimination affects their trust. We make a theoretical case for a formal mediation approach to studying the immigration, discrimination, and trust relationship. This approach shifts attention to the basic fact that the overall levels of discrimination experienced by different immigrant and native-born groups are not the same. We also build on previous empirical research by considering multiple forms of discrimination, multiple types of trust and multiple immigrant/native-born groups. Drawing on the 2013 Canadian General Social Survey data (N = 27,695) we analyze differences in three kinds of trust (generalized trust, trust in specific others, and political trust), and the role of perceived discrimination (ethnic, racial, any), between five immigrant-native groups (Canadian-born whites, Canadian-born people of color, foreign-born whites, foreign-born people of color, and Indigenous people). We find that perceived discrimination is more relevant to general trust and trust in specific others than to political trust. We also find that perceived discrimination explains more of the trust gap between racialized immigrants and the native-born than the gap between non-racialized immigrants and the native-born. The results illustrate that what appears to be a simple relationship is far more complex when attempting to explain group differences.

show abstract

Gen(d)eralized Trust: Women, Work, and Trust in Strangers

Cited by 34 publications

References 47 publications

Vol 9 No 2 (2019)

Vol 9 No 2 (2019)

Negative Experiences and Trust: A Causal Analysis of the Effects of Victimization on Generalized Trust

Immigration, Discrimination, and Trust: A Simply Complex Relationship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About