Understanding Trust and Confidence: Two Paradigms and their Significance for Health and Social Care

Abstract

Trusting agents characteristically anticipate beneficial outcomes, under conditions of uncertainty, in their engagement with others. However, debates about trust incorporate different interpretations of risk, uncertainty, calculation, affect, morality and motivation in explaining when trust is appropriate and how it operates. This article argues that discussions about trust have produced a concept without coherent boundaries and with little operational value. Two paradigms are identified, which distinguish the characteristics of trust and confidence. It is argued that a reliance on confidence in human affairs makes trust redundant and that this has undesirable moral consequences. Discussion is illustrated by the UK Government's 'modernisation' policy in health and social care, which privileges confidence in systems over trust in moral agents.

Homelessness & Health in Canada

“…Trust in health care is often taken for granted but is at issue when there is uncertainty about another's behaviour and how one might be treated (Smith 2005). Lack of trust can negatively impact access to health care.…”

“…Lack of trust can negatively impact access to health care. Trust is most often understood at the interpersonal level and reflects a moral concern for the other (Smith 2005). Rebuilding interpersonal trust between nurses and clients is the first link in building a chain of trust that can facilitate access to the health and social services needed to address complex health and social care challenges.…”

Blood transfusion in Ireland: Perceptions of risk, a question of trust

“…In recent years, a debate has emerged on the difference between trust and confidence. Trust, it has been argued, is a concept that concerns interpersonal relationships whereas confidence is expressed in systems (Smith 2005). Zinn (2004) discusses how theorists such as Beck (1992) and Giddens (1990) have argued that with the erosion of traditional institutions trust has become something that is 'produced actively by individuals' rather than being 'institutionally guaranteed.'…”

Quality risk management. Modernising the architecture of quality assurance

“…This approach presupposes a high level of trust within an institution, and Nahapiet and Ghoshal (2000) suggest that where this is present, people will be more willing to take risks and experiment, increasing the organisation's capacity for dealing with complexity and diversity. The relationship between the concepts of trust and confidence is discussed by Carole Smith (2005).…”