Components of Trust - Differences Between Sweden and the UK. Bengt Jansson, Ph.D., Dept. of Psychology, Göteborg University, P.O. Box 500, SE 405 30 Göteborg, Sweden; Center for Risk Research, Stockholm School of Economics, Box 6501, S-113 83 Stockholm, Sweden, e-mail bj@psy.gu.se, fax +46 31 773 4628
Trust has been recognized as an essential part of risk perception and risk communication. In some sense, the role of trust has been taken for granted. In previous research, however, trust has also been recognized as a concept with contrasting aspects. It has been stated, on the one hand, that trust rarely evolve spontaneously on the level of individual interaction, but depends on the existence of stable legal, political, and social institutions, while, on the other hand, others have concluded that trust is an attitude based on beliefs and feelings with implications for interpretation and evaluation of the behavior of others. Furthermore, it has been suggested that trust is related to consequences of action and risk, but, others have emphasized that regarding trust as a subclass of risk is rather confusing than illuminating, since (personal) trust in itself suppresses a need for calculation of consequences. In general, trust has been reported to be dependent on three factors: knowledge and expertise, honesty and openness, and concern. Moreover, trust has been conceived of as a means to reduce uncertainty and risk in some corporative relationships. Most studies of trust have had a theoretical approach, and less often empirical data is at hand.
The present study, conducted within the RiskPerCom project, analyzes empirical judgments of trust concepts. Ratings of trust by respondents from Sweden and the UK were factor analyzed. Eight trust components were extracted: confidence, or no confidence, in politicians, trust in corporations, honesty, safety, suspiciousness, fraud, and greed. The structure of components was more plain and simple for the Swedish data than it was for the UK data. Moreover, by use of the eight trust components, it was found that ‘trust in authorities', for the Swedish respondents, was best explained by the factors confidence in politicians and honesty. The corresponding, and more contrasting, factors for the UK data were confidence in politicians and suspiciousness. Further differences between the two countries as to trust were found.
Go to . . .
1998 SRA-Europe Table of Contents
1998 SRA-Europe Author Index
Main Abstracts Menu Page
RiskWorld Home Page