IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Understanding trustworthiness: using response latencies from CATI surveys to learn about the “crucial” variable in trust research

Listed author(s):
  • Robert Neumann

    ()

    (Technische Universität Dresden)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract Research on trustworthiness and trust behavior so far has followed different methodological approaches and has generated conflicting evidence regarding their interrelationships. While several authors follow the definition of trustworthiness as a belief or a formed expectancy by Person A about Person B to do X (usually to reward trust), different hypotheses can be derived regarding its formation, depending on whether one treats trustworthiness as incentive-based or as a propensity or disposition. Additionally, distinct measurement approaches for trustworthiness exist, depending on the mode of data collection. With theoretical claims that trustworthiness represents “the crucial variable” (Hardin in Trust, 2006) for understanding and explaining successful cooperation based on trust, the article proposes the use of para-data in the form of response latency measurement to enhance the understanding of the thought processes behind forming an assessment of trustworthiness. The study uses pooled data from two CATI surveys conducted in Germany in 2012 to test hypotheses on the underlying cognitive process of forming an expectation of trustworthiness by applying the techniques of both response latency measurement and Cox regression models. We find that the applied survey measures of trustworthiness generate inconsistent results regarding the underlying process of forming expectations. Consequences for future research are discussed.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-014-0136-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer in its journal Quality & Quantity.

    Volume (Year): 50 (2016)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 43-64

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:50:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-014-0136-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-014-0136-2
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com

    Order Information: Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11135

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Altmann, Steffen & Dohmen, Thomas & Wibral, Matthias, 2008. "Do the reciprocal trust less?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 454-457, June.
    2. Ivar Krumpal, 2013. "Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2025-2047, June.
    3. Cragg, John G, 1971. "Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 829-844, September.
    4. Charness, Gary & Haruvy, Ernan & Sonsino, Doron, 2007. "Social distance and reciprocity: An Internet experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 88-103, May.
    5. repec:pri:rpdevs:gamespaper.pdf is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Sjoerd Beugelsdijk, 2006. "A note on the theory and measurement of trust in explaining differences in economic growth," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 371-387, May.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher & Bernhard von Rosenbladt & J�rgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, "undated". "A Nation-Wide Laboratory: Examining trust and trustworthiness by integrating behavioral experiments into representative surveys," IEW - Working Papers 141, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    8. Williamson, Oliver E, 1993. "Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 453-486, April.
    9. Kaminska, Olena & Foulsham, Tom, 2013. "Understanding sources of social desirability bias in different modes: evidence from eye-tracking," ISER Working Paper Series 2013-04, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    10. Posner, Eric A, 1998. "Symbols, Signals, and Social Norms in Politics and the Law," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 765-798, June.
    11. Paola Sapienza & Anna Toldra‐Simats & Luigi Zingales, 2013. "Understanding Trust," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123(12), pages 1313-1332, December.
    12. Dean S. Karlan, 2005. "Using Experimental Economics to Measure Social Capital and Predict Financial Decisions," Working Papers 182, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Research Program in Development Studies..
    13. Mulligan, Kenneth & Grant, J. Tobin & Mockabee, Stephen T. & Monson, Joseph Quin, 2003. "Response Latency Methodology for Survey Research: Measurement and Modeling Strategies," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(03), pages 289-301, June.
    14. Dufwenberg, Martin & Gneezy, Uri, 2000. "Measuring Beliefs in an Experimental Lost Wallet Game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 163-182, February.
    15. Dean S. Karlan, 2005. "Using Experimental Economics to Measure Social Capital and Predict Financial Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1688-1699, December.
    16. Ben-Ner, Avner & Halldorsson, Freyr, 2010. "Trusting and trustworthiness: What are they, how to measure them, and what affects them," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 64-79, February.
    17. Manuel Becerra, 2002. "Perceived Trustworthiness Within The Organization: The Moderating Impact Of Communication Frequency," Working Papers Economia wp02-05, Instituto de Empresa, Area of Economic Environment.
    18. Cristina Bicchieri, 2010. "Norms, preferences, and conditional behavior," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 9(3), pages 297-313, August.
    19. Eric Uslaner, 2013. "Trust and corruption revisited: how and why trust and corruption shape each other," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 3603-3608, October.
    20. Eric M. Uslaner, 2008. "The foundations of trust: macro and micro," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 289-294, March.
    21. Karl-Dieter Opp, 1999. "Contending Conceptions of the Theory of Rational Action," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(2), pages 171-202, April.
    22. Nava Ashraf & Iris Bohnet & Nikita Piankov, 2006. "Decomposing trust and trustworthiness," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(3), pages 193-208, September.
    23. repec:pri:rpdevs:gamespaper is not listed on IDEAS
    24. William J. Burke, 2009. "Fitting and interpreting Cragg's tobit alternative using Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(4), pages 584-592, December.
    25. Alvin Etang & David Fielding & Stephen Knowles, 2012. "Are Survey Measures of Trust Correlated with Experimental Trust? Evidence from Cameroon," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(12), pages 1813-1827, December.
    26. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:50:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-014-0136-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)

    or (Rebekah McClure)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.