IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v101y2020i3p1150-1164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relationships of Horizontalism and Hierarchy: Exploring Divergent Forms of Sociopolitical Trust

Author

Listed:
  • Dana M. Williams

Abstract

Objective Propose a conceptualization of trust that acknowledges varying levels of power between trusting partners. The weak, positive statistical correlation between social and political trust conceals very different experiences of trust. While many people possess either high or low levels of both forms of trust, others have divergent levels of the two forms of trust. Present a simple typology of sociopolitical trust that categorizes individuals as trusters, distrusters, hierarchicalists, and horizontalists. Methods Exploratory analysis of United States using the World Values Survey. Multivariate analysis of sociopolitical trust's effect upon protest and voting. Results Americans have low levels of political trust and higher levels of social trust. Protesters possess social trust and political distrust, and voters are both social and political trusters. Conclusion The combination of social trust and political trust impacts public participation preferences. Protesters embody a libertarian‐socialist orientation toward sociopolitical trust, while voters possess a social‐democrat orientation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dana M. Williams, 2020. "Relationships of Horizontalism and Hierarchy: Exploring Divergent Forms of Sociopolitical Trust," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(3), pages 1150-1164, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:3:p:1150-1164
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12784
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12784
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12784?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luke Keele, 2007. "Social Capital and the Dynamics of Trust in Government," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(2), pages 241-254, April.
    2. Michaelene Cox, 2003. "When Trust Matters: Explaining Differences in Voter Turnout," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41, pages 757-770, September.
    3. Michaelene Cox, 2003. "When Trust Matters: Explaining Differences in Voter Turnout," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 757-770, September.
    4. Blaine G. Robbins, 2011. "Neither government nor community alone: A test of state-centered models of generalized trust," Rationality and Society, , vol. 23(3), pages 304-346, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bonnie Averbuch & Martin Hvarregaard Thorsøe & Chris Kjeldsen, 2022. "Using fuzzy cognitive mapping and social capital to explain differences in sustainability perceptions between farmers in the northeast US and Denmark," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 435-453, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elizaveta Kopacheva, 2021. "Predicting online participation through Bayesian network analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Heike Delfmann, 2012. "Population change and new firm formation in urban and rural regions," ERSA conference papers ersa12p466, European Regional Science Association.
    3. Ozdemir, Ugur & Ozkes, Ali & Sanver, Remzi, 2023. "Ability or motivation? Voter registration and turnout in Burkina Faso," OSF Preprints x5wbj, Center for Open Science.
    4. Donald J. Lacombe & Garth J. Holloway & Timothy M. Shaughnessy, 2014. "Bayesian Estimation of the Spatial Durbin Error Model with an Application to Voter Turnout in the 2004 Presidential Election," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 37(3), pages 298-327, July.
    5. Heike Delfmann & Sierdjan Koster & Philip McCann & Jouke Van Dijk, 2014. "Population Change and New Firm Formation in Urban and Rural Regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(6), pages 1034-1050, June.
    6. repec:gig:joupla:v:4:y:2012:i:2:p:89-123 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Joseph A Hamm & Corwin Smidt & Roger C Mayer, 2019. "Understanding the psychological nature and mechanisms of political trust," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, May.
    8. Paschalis Arvanitidis & Athina Economou & Christos Kollias, 2016. "Terrorism’s effects on social capital in European countries," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 231-250, December.
    9. Massimo Finocchiaro Castro & Calogero Guccio, 2020. "Birds of a feather flock together: trust in government, political selection and electoral punishment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 263-287, September.
    10. Jae Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2020. "Perceived Environmental Threats and Pro-Environmental Behaviors: Investigating the Role of Political Participation Using a South Korean Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-16, May.
    11. Luis Guirola & Gonzalo Rivero, 2022. "Polarization contaminates the link with partisan and independent institutions: evidence from 138 cabinet shifts," Working Papers 2237, Banco de España.
    12. Ligthart, Jenny E. & van Oudheusden, Peter, 2015. "In government we trust: The role of fiscal decentralization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 116-128.
    13. Jae Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2020. "Examining the Moderation Effect of Political Trust on the Linkage between Civic Morality and Support for Environmental Taxation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    14. Jae-Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2022. "Political Trust and Support for a Tax Increase for Social Welfare: The Role of Perceived Tax Burden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-12, June.
    15. Louis Fucilla, 2021. "Does the Bureaucracy Affect Trust in Government? Evidence from Aggregate Public Opinion," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 69-82, January.
    16. Lis, Piotr, 2011. "Fatality sensitivity in coalition countries: a study of British, Polish and Australian public opinion on the Iraq war," MPRA Paper 61490, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Aug 2013.
    17. Gangl, Katharina & van Dijk, Wilco W. & van Dijk, Eric & Hofmann, Eva, 2020. "Building versus maintaining a perceived confidence-based tax climate: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    18. Anna Almakaeva & Eduard Ponarin & Christian Welzel, 2014. "Human Development And Generalized Trust: Multilevel Evidence," HSE Working papers WP BRP 58/SOC/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    19. Kimlong Chheng & Budy P. Resosudarmo, 2021. "Land property rights and food insecurity in rural Cambodia," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(6), pages 1911-1929, December.
    20. Mark D. Ramirez, 2009. "The Dynamics of Partisan Conflict on Congressional Approval," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 681-694, July.
    21. Thomas Clark Durant & Michael Weintraub & Daniel Houser & Shuwen Li, 2018. "Trust in the executive," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(5), pages 609-624, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:3:p:1150-1164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.