When do children trust the expert? Benevolence information influences children's trust more than expertise

How do children use informant niceness, meanness, and expertise when choosing between informant claims and crediting informants with knowledge? In Experiment 1, preschoolers met two experts providing conflicting claims for which only one had relevant expertise. Five‐year‐olds endorsed the relevant expert's claim and credited him with knowledge more often than 3‐year‐olds. In Experiment 2, niceness/meanness information was added. Although children most strongly preferred the nice relevant expert, the children often chose the nice irrelevant expert when the relevant one was mean. In Experiment 3, a mean expert was paired with a nice non‐expert. Although this nice informant had no expertise, preschoolers continued to endorse his claims and credit him with knowledge. Also noteworthy, children in all three experiments seemed to struggle more to choose the relevant expert's claim than to credit him with knowledge. Together, these experiments demonstrate that niceness/meanness information can powerfully influence how children evaluate informants.     

Should I trust you? Autistic traits predict reduced appearance‐based trust decisions

Facial impressions of trustworthiness guide social decisions in the general population, as shown by financial lending in economic Trust Games. As an exception, autistic boys fail to use facial impressions to guide trust decisions, despite forming typical facial trustworthiness impressions (Autism, 19, 2015a, 1002). Here, we tested whether this dissociation between forming and using facial impressions of trustworthiness extends to neurotypical men with high levels of autistic traits. Forty‐six Caucasian men completed a multi‐turn Trust Game, a facial trustworthiness impressions task, the Autism‐Spectrum Quotient, and two Theory of Mind tasks. As hypothesized, participants’ levels of autistic traits had no observed effect on the impressions formed, but negatively predicted the use of those impressions in trust decisions. Thus, the dissociation between forming and using facial impressions of trustworthiness extends to the broader autism phenotype. More broadly, our results identify autistic traits as an important source of individual variation in the use of facial impressions to guide behaviour. Interestingly, failure to use these impressions could potentially represent rational behaviour, given their limited validity.     

Explaining the justice-performance relationship: trust as exchange deepener or trust as uncertainty reducer?

Past research has revealed significant relationships between organizational justice dimensions and job performance, and trust is thought to be one mediator of those relationships. However, trust has been positioned in justice theorizing in 2 different ways, either as an indicator of the depth of an exchange relationship or as a variable that reflects levels of work-related uncertainty. Moreover, trust scholars distinguish between multiple forms of trust, including affect- and cognition-based trust, and it remains unclear which form is most relevant to justice effects. To explore these issues, we built and tested a more comprehensive model of trust mediation in which procedural, interpersonal, and distributive justice predicted affect- and cognition-based trust, with those trust forms predicting both exchange- and uncertainty-based mechanisms. The results of a field study in a hospital system revealed that the trust variables did indeed mediate the relationships between the organizational justice dimensions and job performance, with affect-based trust driving exchange-based mediation and cognition-based trust driving uncertainty-based mediation.     

Betting on a brand: How can trust game experiments inform a brand trust research agenda?

For brands to succeed, they often need consumers to trust them. This has prompted marketing and consumer behaviour researchers to examine what makes certain brands more trusted and how brands can identify themselves as trustworthy. For over 25 years, experimental economists, behavioural scientists and others have examined interpersonal trust using an exercise — the trust game — where participants put money at risk based on how trustworthy they think other people are. This research has remained largely separate from work on brand trust, but this critical review aims to identify findings and concepts from trust game-based research that are relevant to brand trust, and starts to develop an integrated research agenda for the future. In particular, it looks at how brand trust is measured, how brand trust might (or might not) be distinguished from transactional risk, and the heuristics and biases behind brand trust judgements and how these relate to brands' attempts to signal their trustworthiness.     

How the initial level of trust in automated driving impacts drivers’ behaviour and early trust construction

Trust in Automation is known to influence human-automation interaction and user behaviour. In the Automated Driving (AD) context, studies showed the impact of drivers’ Trust in Automated Driving (TiAD), and linked it with, e.g., difference in environment monitoring or driver’s behaviour. This study investigated the influence of driver’s initial level of TiAD on driver’s behaviour and early trust construction during Highly Automated Driving (HAD). Forty drivers participated in a driving simulator study. Based on a trust questionnaire, participants were divided in two groups according to their initial level of TiAD: high (Trustful) vs. low (Distrustful). Declared level of trust, gaze behaviour and Non-Driving-Related Activities (NDRA) engagement were compared between the two groups over time. Results showed that Trustful drivers engaged more in NDRA and spent less time monitoring the road compared to Distrustful drivers. However, an increase in trust was observed in both groups. These results suggest that initial level of TiAD impact drivers’ behaviour and further trust evolution.     

In money we trust? The use of financial compensations to repair trust in the aftermath of distributive harm

Trust is vital yet vulnerable in economic exchange relations. In these relations, a widely used strategy in response to distributive harm consists of having the transgressor pay a financial compensation to the victim. This research examines whether financial compensations can increase trust towards a transgressor, and whether the size of the compensation is relevant to this process. We hypothesized and found that whether larger compensations will elicit more trust, depends on how clear the perpetrator’s intention to transgress was. Experiment 1 revealed that trust perceptions increased more by a slight overcompensation of the inflicted harm as compared to an exact or a partial compensation, but not if the transgressor’s bad intentions became clear through the use of deception in the violation. In Experiments 2 and 3, we replicated these findings and further showed that it is not the use of deception per se, but rather the attribution of bad intent that moderates the effect of compensation size. Experiment 4, using a trust game paradigm revealed that this effect not only occurs for small overcompensations, but also for larger overcompensations.     

What does it mean to trust blockchain technology?

This paper argues that the widespread belief that interactions between blockchains and their users are trust-free is inaccurate and misleading, since this belief not only overlooks the vital role played by trust in the lack of knowledge and control but also conceals the moral and normative relevance of relying on blockchain applications. The paper reaches this argument by providing a close philosophical examination of the concept referred to as trust in blockchain technology, clarifying the trustor group, the structure, and the normatively loaded nature of this trust relation. The paper ends by critically reflecting on two of the most promising values (decentralization and transparency) that can invite users’ trust in blockchain technology, arguing that there is a tension between the pressing values that are intended to be achieved by developers and the predicament situations caused by current blockchain implementations.     

When can we trust theF-approximation of the box-test?

Consider a multivariate context withp variates andk independent samples, each of sizen. To test equality of thek population covariance matrices, the likelihood ratio test is commonly employed. Box'sF-approximation to the null distribution of the test statistic can be used to computep-values, if sample sizes are not too small. It is suggested to regard theF-approximation as accurate if the sample sizesn are greater than or equal to 1+0.0613p ²+2.7265p-1.4182p ^0.5+0.235p ^1.4* In (k), for 5p30,k20.This research was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft through Ste 405/2-1.     

Does betrayal aversion really guide trust decisions towards strangers?

Trust is a double-edged sword. When warranted, it leads to positive and rewarding interactions. When not, it leads to disappointment and anger. Therefore, it has been argued that people will display “betrayal aversion” in trust situations (i.e., avoid trusting to avoid betrayal). Yet, people also feel tense and uneasy when they signal distrust to another person and thus show signs of “principled trustfulness” (i.e., choosing to trust others although being skeptical of their trustworthiness). These two theoretical orientations imply directly opposite influences on trust behavior. Thus, we conducted two laboratory studies (with a total of 841 participants) with binary trust games (implying a risk of being betrayed) and extended lottery games (implying no such risk). In both studies, we varied the payoff structures of both games. Further, we made sure that the average perceived likelihood of winning or losing money when choosing the risky option was identical in both games, as was the distribution of these likelihoods. Neither study showed any sign of betrayal aversion. Rather, participants were more willing to risk their money in the trust game than they were to invest their money in a lottery, supporting the principled trustfulness view. We discuss possible explanations why, unlike previous studies, we did not find any indication of betrayal aversion.     

Who do we trust? Differences in types of trust and beliefs in conspiracy theories between vaccinated and unvaccinated Europeans across 17 European countries

A plethora of research has highlighted that trust in science, political trust, and conspiracy theories are all important contributors to vaccine uptake behavior. In the current investigation, relying on data from 17 countries (N = 30,096) from the European Social Survey we examined how those who received (and wanted to receive the COVID-19 vaccine) compared to those who did not differ in their trust in: science, politicians and political parties, international organizations and towards people in general. We also examined whether they differed in how much they believed in conspiracy theories. Those who received (or wanted to receive) the COVID vaccine scored significantly higher in all forms of trust, and lower in conspiracy theory beliefs. A logistic regression suggested that trust in science, politicians, international organizations, as well as belief in conspiracy theories were significant predictors, even after accounting for key demographic characteristics.     

7–0? That is awful! Should I trust my national team again?: The role of mindsets in team trust

This investigation examined the role of mindsets in team trust after a major loss. It is proposed that individuals can believe that personal characteristics are fixed and that there is not much one can do about it (a fixed mindset) or that personal characteristics are malleable and that one can improve (a growth mindset). The participants, self-identified football fans, were shown a picture of a major loss experienced by the Mexican national team and then answered questions that assessed the participants' team trust, intention to provide future support, and mindsets. We conceptualised mindsets as latent variables and classes to test our hypotheses. The results from the latent variable model showed a significant, positive influence of a growth mindset on team trust. Similarly, the results from the latent class model showed that the class characterised by high levels of a growth mindset was more likely to trust the national team. Regarding intentions to provide future support to the national team, a growth mindset had an indirect, positive effect through its influence on team trust. Similarly, the class with high levels of a growth mindset was more likely to support the national team in the future. The implications for social psychology and consumer behaviour are discussed.     

Expectation of outgroup behaviour: can you trust the outgroup?

Outgroups are usually viewed with suspicion and expected to discriminate against the ingroup. The present study demonstrated that ingroup members attributed past discriminatory behaviour committed by individuals of unknown group membership more to outgroup members than to either ingroup members or members of a neutral group. In contrast, past egalitarian behaviour was attributed less to outgroup members than to members of a neutral group. Ingroup members also expected more discrimination from a future outgroup allocator than from a future neutral group allocator. Finally, the study showed that ingroup members' own behaviour in allocating money became more biased in favour of ingroup members vis-á-vis outgroup members when the future allocator was from an outgroup rather than from a neutral group and when they had witnessed the discriminatory behaviour of an allocator in the past.     

The impact of emotional expressions on children’s trust judgments

Research on the development of selective trust has shown that young children do not indiscriminately trust all potential informants. They are likely to seek and endorse information from individuals who have proven competent or benign in the past. However, research on trust among adults raises the possibility that children might also be influenced by the emotions expressed by potential informants. In particular, they might trust individuals expressing more positive emotion. Indeed, young children’s trust in particular informants based on their past behaviour might be undermined by their currently expressed emotions. To examine this possibility, we tested the selective trust of fifty 4- and 5-year-olds in two steps. We first confirmed that children are likely to invest more trust in individuals expressing more positive emotion. We then showed that even if children have already formed an impression of two potential informants based on their behavioural record, their choices about whose claims to trust are markedly influenced by the degree of positive emotion currently expressed by the two informants. By implication, the facial emotions expressed by potential informants can undermine young children’s selective trust based on the behavioural record of those informants.     

Predictive gaze cues and personality judgments: Should eye trust you?

Although following another person's gaze is essential in fluent social interactions, the reflexive nature of this gaze-cuing effect means that gaze can be used to deceive. In a gaze-cuing procedure, participants were presented with several faces that looked to the left or right. Some faces always looked to the target (predictive-valid), some never looked to the target (predictive-invalid), and others looked toward and away from the target in equal proportions (nonpredictive). The standard gaze-cuing effects appeared to be unaffected by these contingencies. Nevertheless, participants tended to choose the predictive-valid faces as appearing more trustworthy than the predictive-invalid faces. This effect was negatively related to scores on a scale assessing autistic-like traits. Further, we present tentative evidence that the "deceptive" faces were encoded more strongly in memory than the "cooperative" faces. These data demonstrate the important interactions among attention, gaze perception, facial identity recognition, and personality judgments.     

Do differences in general trust explain cultural differences in dispositionism?1

Abstract: It has been suggested that Westerners are more inclined than Easterners to endorse dispositionism. To help explain what produces this cultural difference, I examined the responses of Japanese and American students to determine whether levels of general trust, which is the expectation of benign or cooperative behavior based on the goodwill of another person (Yamagishi & Yamagishi, 1994), would matter. As predicted, in accounting for either a prosocial or deviant behavior, high trusters were more likely than low trusters to show dispositionism on all three measures (dispositional attribution, trait inference, and behavioral consistency), whereas cultural differences in dispositionism almost vanished. This tendency was found regardless of the desirability of behaviors.     

What is the function of faith and trust in psychoanalysis?1

Unlike other concepts such as ‘illusion’, ‘capacity to tolerate frustration’ and ‘libidinal investment’, the concept of faith has not yet found a well‐defined position in psychoanalytic theory. Bion focused on faith and placed it in an unusual context: scientific work. Through the Act of Faith a researcher can give some consistency to certain ideas, hunches or intuitions that may appear during observation, though he cannot represent them by existing theory. Through the Act of Faith an analyst can ‘see’, ‘hear’ and ‘feel’ those mental phenomena, the reality of which leaves no practising psychoanalysts in doubt, even if they cannot represent them by current formulations. In this paper, the author aims to expand Bion's proposals into the clinical and therapeutic fields. In the first part, the author examines how faith and trust overlap, and how they depart from each other, and he gives an example. Faith possesses an igniting and driving force which trust doesn't possess to the same extent. In the second part, the author looks at F as a psychic function of the analyst, which aids him in supporting a depressed and hopeless patient while waiting for the return of the patient's desire to live. In the final part, he focuses on F from the patient's point of view and studies the transformations of F that may occur during an analysis.     

Is interpersonal and institutional e‐trustworthiness equally important in consumer e‐trust development? Implications for consumers' e‐trust building behaviours

Trust is a widely studied phenomenon across numerous disciplines. E‐trust researchers have conducted a vast number of studies, but despite extensive interest in the issue, there are only few studies that concentrate on how consumers build e‐trust. Furthermore, consumer e‐trust is seen to be a function of both interpersonal and institutional e‐trustworthiness, but only limited number of attempts have been conducted to study the relative importance of interpersonal and institutional e‐trustworthiness in consumer e‐trust development process. The present article seeks to improve this situation by studying how consumers' perceived interpersonal and institutional e‐trustworthiness influence their intention to build e‐trust. The results of the study suggest that consumers build e‐trust actively, and the development of e‐trust is not only based on trustees' behaviour. Moreover, the results indicate that interpersonal e‐trustworthiness is more important than institutional e‐trustworthiness in consumers' e‐trust building. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The integrity of Web-delivered experiments: can you trust the data?

Data from Web-delivered experiments conducted in browsers by remote users of PsychExperiments, a public on-line psychology laboratory, reveal experiment effects that mirror lab-based findings, even for experiments that require nearly millisecond accuracy of displays and responses. Textbook results are obtained not just for within-subjects effects, but for between-subjects effects as well. These results suggest that existing technology is adequate to permit Web delivery of many cognitive and social psychological experiments and that the added noise created by having participants in different settings using different computers is easily compensated for by the sample sizes achievable with Web delivery.