The Importance of Multiple Performance Criteria for Understanding Trust in Risk Managers

Effective risk management requires balancing several, sometimes competing, goals, such as protecting public health and ensuring cost control. Research examining public trust of risk managers has largely focused on trust that is unspecified or for a single goal. Yet it can be reasonable to have a high level of trust in one aspect of a target's performance but not another. Two studies involving redevelopment of contaminated land (Study 1) and drinking water standards (Study 2) present preliminary evidence on the value of distinguishing between performance criteria for understanding of trust. Study 1 assessed perceptions of several trust targets (councilors, developers, scientists, residents) on their competence (capacity to achieve goals) and willingness to take action under uncertainty for four criteria. Study 2 assessed competence, willingness, and trust for five criteria regarding a single government agency. In both studies overall trust in each target was significantly better explained by considering perceptions of their performance on multiple criteria than on the single criterion of public health. In Study 1, the influence of criteria also varied plausibly across trust targets (e.g., willingness to act under uncertainty increased trust in developers on cost control and councilors on local economic improvement, but decreased it for both targets on environmental protection). Study 2 showed that explained variance in trust increased with both dimension‐ and trust‐based measures of criteria. Further conceptual and methodological development of the notion of multiple trust criteria could benefit our understanding of stated trust judgments.     

Building Trusting Multicultural Organizations: Rethinking the Influence of Culture on Interpersonal Trust Development in the Workplace

Building trusting, multicultural organizations require us to accentuate ‘sharedness’ rather than identifying differences. This study investigates how organizational members activate multiple sources of cultural values to develop trust with their colleagues from different cultural backgrounds. Through a series of surveys followed by semi-structured interviews, data were collected from members operating in five different multinational organizations based in Germany and South Africa. Analyzed abductively, our findings illustrate the multiple sources of cultural values that influence members' disposition to trust and their assessment of their colleague's trustworthiness. We further show how four levels of trust emerge as an outcome of the interplay between these various cultural dimensions. Through our multidimensional operationalization of culture, we show how variations, not only across, but within individuals can hinder or promote trusting relationships in the workplace. This study highlights the need for more nuanced approaches towards the examination of the influence of culture on trust.     

Limits of Knowledge and the Limited Importance of Trust

Perceived risk and related attitudes have been implicated as major factors in many of the difficult policy problems that face modern society (nuclear power, genetically modified food, etc). Experts often argue that no or very small risks are involved; people are still worried. Why? The standard answer is lack of trust. Data on trust and risk perception, however, point to only a weak relationship between the two (r approximately 0.3). It is suggested here that the reason for the surprisingly minor importance of trust is that people believe that there are clear limits to how much science and experts know. Results are presented from studies of risk perception of the public, experts, and politicians. Politicians and members of the public believe that there are many unknown effects of technology and such beliefs were strongly related to their perceived risk. Experts on nuclear waste, on the other hand, seemed to believe that little is unknown in their field of expertise. Regression analyses of risk perception showed the unknown‐effects factor to be a more important explanatory factor than trust for the public and politicians.     

Public Trust in Government Concerning Tobacco Control in Japan

This study investigated public trust and its determinants concerning the government's control of tobacco in Japan. We focused on the two issues of government policies to ban smoking by minors and increase taxes on tobacco. We conducted a questionnaire survey in which respondents were asked to assess their trust in the government, the government's fairness and competency, and their value similarity with the government. One thousand three hundred and ninety-four respondents agreed to participate in the survey out of 2,600 randomly sampled adults over 20 years old from all over Japan. The results of multiple regression analysis confirmed that value similarity is the strongest predictor of public trust in the government. On the affirmatively supported issue of prohibiting smoking among minors, the results further indicated that assessment of competency is a stronger predictor than assessment of fairness. In contrast, assessment of fairness is a stronger predictor than assessment of competency for the still divided issue of increasing tobacco tax. Respondents who had low concern and had not formed clear opinions on the issues showed a weak link between assessment of value similarity and trust. Based on these findings, we considered the implications for the government's implementation of tobacco controls.     

The Origin and Role of Trust in Local Policy Elites’ Perceptions of High‐Voltage Power Line Installations in the State of Arkansas

The debate over an installation of high‐voltage power lines (HVPLs) has been intense, particularly in northwest Arkansas. Detractors claim that the installation will negatively affect both the natural environment and the local economy, which contains a large tourism component. By contrast, those in favor of installing HVPLs claim that the installation is necessary in order to reliably support the increasing demand for electric power. Using original data collected from a recent statewide Internet survey of 420 local policy elites in Arkansas, this article focuses on two key aspects. First, we examine how local policy elites’ perceptions of risks versus benefits of HVPL installation in their communities are influenced by their levels of trust toward information provided by various sources (e.g., energy industry, environmental groups, and government). Second, we utilize cultural theory to explain how the cultural worldviews of policy elites––specifically, egalitarianism, individualism, hierarchism, and fatalism––shape these levels of trust and HVPL benefit‐risk perceptions, while controlling for other factors claimed by previous literature, including levels of knowledge on energy‐related issues and demographic characteristics. In general, our analysis indicates that policy elites’ value‐oriented formation of HVPL benefit‐risk perceptions is partially due to the influence cultural values have on trust in information sources. We conclude this article by discussing broader implications for the origin and role of trust in policy elites’ decisions throughout the policy‐making process.     

“政策领域-时间维度”双重视角下新能源汽车产业政策央地协同研究

本文以2009—2018年间中央及地方（以北京市等四个地区为例）颁布的263项新能源汽车产业政策为研究样本,从实施领域角度,将产业政策分为财税支持、行业规范、规划引导、监督保障、其他措施等五类,经政策分解,将政策片段与新能源汽车产业链五个环节进行匹配;在此基础上,测度不同时期产业政策央地总体协同度与政策实施领域间的协同度,并通过逐步回归法,确定影响政策协同的各政策效力指标灵敏度。研究表明："中央-北京"和"中央-深圳"的政策措施协同趋势基本一致,产业价值链各环节发展较均衡,而"中央-上海"和"中央-江苏"的政策措施协同趋势基本一致,存在"重使用、轻研发、轻市场"等失调现象;四地区与中央政策措施的协同差异主要体现在研发、生产和回收环节,提升"政策引导"和"保障措施"指标的政策效力有助于提升央地协同水平。根据政策分析,未来政策制定需从优化中央政策推广方式和加强监管保障等政策措施着手,根据产业链不同环节状况适时调整政策措施。     

Multilevel causal attributions on transboundary risk: Effects on attributions of responsibility,psychological distance,and policy support

This study used two randomized experiments in a prospective design (Study 1 N = 297, Study 2 N = 296) to examine how multilevel causal attribution dimensions (internal vs. external to an individual or a country) shape domestic and foreign policy support to counter transboundary risk. Results from Study 1 and 2 showed that external-country (vs. internal-country) causal attribution reduced perceptions of internal-country attributions of responsibility, which had a cross-lagged effect on support for domestic-industry policies to mitigate the risk. In contrast, perceptions of external-country attributions of responsibility increased support for foreign policies in a 2-week follow up. This study offers theoretical insights into the demarcation of multilevel causal attribution dimensions in studying media framing effects. It also highlights some important causal mechanisms of how media frames shape public support for policies aimed at transboundary risk mitigation.     

Determinants of Trust in Industry, Government, and Citizen''s Groups in Japan

The causal structure of the determinants of trust in industry, government, and citizen's groups in Japan was investigated on the basis of Peters et al. (1997). A preliminary survey of the adequacy of the hypotheses proposed by Peters et al. in Japan was made. A set of hypothesized determinants of trust in Japan was proposed based on results of the preliminary survey. Questionnaires concerning perceptions of trust in the organizations and the proposed determinants were sent by mail to residents in the area where environmental risk problems had emerged. The data were analyzed by covariance structure analysis to construct models of trust in industry, government, and citizen's groups. As a result, "openness and honesty," "concern and care," "competence," "people's concern with risks," and "consensual values" were found to be factors directly determining trust. Suggested in particular is that "openness" of an organization is not attained merely by information disclosure, but also by bi-directional communication with the people. Moreover, these models include "consensual values," which do not appear in the model proposed by Peters et al.     

The Perceived Health Risks of Indoor Radon Gas and Overhead Powerlines: A Comparative Multilevel Approach

Radon and overhead powerlines are two radiation risk cases that have raised varying levels of concern among the general public and experts. Despite both involving radiation—a typically feared and unseen health hazard—individuals' perceptions of the two risk cases may invoke rather different factors. We examined individual and geographic-contextual factors influencing public perceptions of the health risks of indoor radon gas and overhead powerlines in a comparative research design, utilizing a postal questionnaire with 1,528 members of the general public (response rate 28%) and multilevel modeling techniques. This study found that beliefs about the two risk cases mainly differed according to the level of "exposure"—defined here in terms of spatial proximity. We argue that there are two alternative explanations for this pattern of findings: that risk perception itself varies directly with proximity, or that risk is more salient to concerned people in the exposed areas. We also found that while people living in high radon areas are more concerned about the risks of indoor radon gas, they find these risks more acceptable and have more trust in authorities. These results might reflect the positive effects of successive radon campaigns in high radon areas, which may have raised awareness and concern, and at the same time may have helped to increase trust by showing that the government takes the health risks of indoor radon gas seriously, suggesting that genuine risk communication initiatives may have positive impacts on trust in risk management institutions.     

Test of a Trust and Confidence Model in the Applied Context of Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Risks

Trust is an important factor in risk management. There is little agreement among researchers, however, on how trust in risk management should be studied. Based on a comprehensive review of the trust literature a "dual-mode model of social trust and confidence" is proposed. Trust and confidence are separate but, under some circumstances, interacting sources of cooperation. Trust is based on value similarity, and confidence is based on performance. According to our model, judging similarity between an observer's currently active values and the values attributed to others determines social trust. Thus, the basis for trust is a judgment that the person to be trusted would act as the trusting person would. Interpretation of the other's performance influences confidence. Both social trust and confidence have an impact on people's willingness to cooperate (e.g., accept electromagnetic fields or EMF in the neighborhood). The postulated model was tested in the applied context of EMF risks. Structural equation modeling procedures and data from a random sample of 1,313 Swiss citizens between 18 and 74 years old were used. Results indicated that after minor modifications the model explained the data very well. In the applied context of EMF risks, both trust and confidence had an impact on cooperation. Results suggest that the dual-mode model of social trust and confidence could be used as a common framework in the field of trust and risk management. Practical implications of the results are discussed.     

Trust, Confidence, and the 2008 Global Financial Crisis

The 2008 global financial crisis has been compared to a "once-in-a-century credit tsunami," a disaster in which the loss of trust and confidence played key precipitating roles and the recovery from which will require the restoration of these crucial factors. Drawing on the analogy between the financial crisis and environmental and technological hazards, recent research on the role of trust and confidence in the latter is used to provide a perspective on the former. Whereas "trust" and "confidence" are used interchangeably and without explicit definition in most discussions of the financial crisis, this perspective uses the TCC model of cooperation to clearly distinguish between the two and to demonstrate how this distinction can lead to an improved understanding of the crisis. The roles of trust and confidence—both in precipitation and in possible recovery—are discussed for each of the three major sets of actors in the crisis, the regulators, the banks, and the public. The roles of trust and confidence in the larger context of risk management are also examined; trust being associated with political approaches, confidence with technical. Finally, the various stances that government can take with regard to trust—such as supportive or skeptical—are considered. Overall, it is argued that a clear understanding of trust and confidence and a close examination of the specific, concrete circumstances of a crisis—revealing when either trust or confidence is appropriate—can lead to useful insights for both recovery and prevention of future occurrences.     

Mediating and Moderating Roles of Trust in Government in Effective Risk Rumor Management: A Test Case of Radiation‐Contaminated Seafood in South Korea

This study has two aims: to identify effective strategies for managing false rumors about risks and to investigate the roles that basic and situational trust in government play in that process. Online experiment data were collected nationwide from 915 adults in South Korea. They were exposed to a false rumor about radiation‐contaminated seafood and were randomly assigned to one of three rumor response conditions (refutation, denial, attack the attacker). One‐way ANOVA indicated that the refutation response yielded the highest level of situational trust in government response (TGR). Results of moderated mediation models using the PROCESS Macro indicated the following. (1) The refutation response had a positive effect on TGR, and the attack response had a negative effect. (2) There were significant interaction effects between the attack response and preexisting basic trust in government (BTG) in that the attack response had a negative effect on TGR only when BTG was low. (3) TGR significantly mediated the relationship between each of the three rumor responses and two dependent variables (intentions for rumor dissemination and for unwarranted actions), but in dramatically different ways across the responses. This study provides evidence for the superior effectiveness of the refutation rumor response and identifies specific roles of trust in government in the risk rumor management process.     

How Do People Evaluate Risk Reduction When They Are Told Zero Risk Is Impossible?

Two studies examined how people evaluate risk reduction when they believe zero risk to be impossible. Measures collected were willingness to pay (WTP) for risk reduction, and degree of trust in the risk management agency. The findings from the combined studies are: (1) participants were more willing to pay a higher amount for the same reduction in risk in the "zero risk possible" than in the "zero risk impossible" condition; and (2) people's trust in the risk management agency did not differ between the "zero risk impossible" and "zero risk possible" conditions. These results suggest that it might be viable for agencies to accurately communicate the unattainability of zero risk without suffering a loss in public faith or trust, and thus that excessive expenditure for risk reduction might be prevented.     

Trust and Risk Perception in Western Europe: A Cross-National Study

The relationship between trust and risk perception was investigated, within and across four European countries (Sweden, Spain, United Kingdom, and France). Survey data were collected in 1996; total number of respondents was approximately 1,000 (United Kingdom and Spain), 1,350 (France), and 2,050 (Sweden). Trust was a significant predictor of perceived risk within countries, but the strength of the relationship varied from weak (Spain and France) to moderate (United Kingdom and Sweden). General trust was also a significant source of variation in perceived risk among countries, but much of the variation in perceived risk remained unexplained. Correlations between trust and risk perception also varied depending on the type of risk (i.e., nuclear risks were more influenced by trust) and trust measure (i.e., general trust explained perceived risk better than specific trust). It is concluded that trust may be an element in models explaining risk perception, but it is not as powerful as often argued in the risk perception literature.     

Trust in Risk Regulation: Cause or Consequence of the Acceptability of GM Food?

Although there is ample empirical evidence that trust in risk regulation is strongly related to the perception and acceptability of risk, it is less clear what the direction of this relationship is. This article explores the nature of the relationship, using three separate data sets on perceptions of genetically modified (GM) food among the British public. The article has two discrete but closely interrelated objectives. First, it compares two models of trust. More specifically, it investigates whether trust is the cause (causal chain account) or the consequence (associationist view) of the acceptability of GM food. Second, this study explores whether the affect heuristic can be applied to a wider number of risk-relevant concepts than just perceived risk and benefit. The results suggest that, rather than a determinant, trust is an expression or indicator of the acceptability of GM food. In addition, and as predicted, "affect" accounts for a large portion of the variance between perceived risk, perceived benefit, trust in risk regulation, and acceptability. Overall, the results support the associationist view that specific risk judgments are driven by more general evaluative judgments The implications of these results for risk communication and policy are discussed.     

政府支持、信任与供应链外部整合的关系研究

当前学术界对于影响供应链整合的因素、这些因素如何影响到供应链整合的研究相对匮乏。本研究则以广东省珠三角地区251家制造业为调查对象,构建了政府支持、信任与供应链外部整合之间关系的理论模型,以结构方程为工具,对政府支持、客户信任、供应商信任、客户整合、供应商整合之间的关系进行了实证研究。研究结果表明,政府支持对客户信任、供应商信任均有显著的正向影响;政府支持对客户整合、供应商整合也均有显著的影响;信任对供应链外部整合具有显著的正向影响;此外,政府支持会以信任为中介,间接地对供应链外部整合产生影响,本研究弥补了我国情境下制度与信任因素对供应链整合影响相关研究的空缺,研究结果对我国制造业进行高效供应链整合具有一定的启发意义。     

Marginal Trust in Risk Managers: Building and Losing Trust Following Decisions Under Uncertainty

Although a considerable amount of research has examined correlates of baseline public trust in risk managers, much less research has looked at marginal changes in public trust following specific events. Such research is important for identifying what kinds of events will lead to increases and decreases in public trust and thus for understanding how trust is built and lost. Using a taxonomy based upon signal detection theory (SDT), the current article presents two experimental studies examining marginal trust change following eight different types of events. Supporting predictions, cautious decisionmakers who accepted signs of danger (Hits and False Alarms) were more likely to be trusted than those who rejected them (All Clears and Misses). Moreover, transparency about an event was associated with higher levels of marginal trust than a lack of transparency in line with earlier findings. Contrary to predictions, however, trust was less affected by whether the decisions were correct (i.e., Hits and All Clears) or incorrect (i.e., False Alarms and Misses). This finding was primarily due to a "False Alarm Effect" whereby Open False Alarms led to positive increases in trust despite being incorrect assessments of risk. Results are explained in terms of a cue diagnosticity account of impression formation and suggest that a taxonomy of event types based on SDT may be useful in furthering our understanding of how public trust in risk managers is gained and lost.     

An Empirical Test of Competing Theories of Hazard-Related Trust: The Case of GM Food

Few scholars doubt the importance of trust in explaining variation in public perception of technological risk. Relatively little, however, is known about the particular types of judgments that people use in granting or withholding trust. This article presents findings from an empirical study that explores several dimensions of trust relevant for citizens' judgments of scientists involved in the development of GM food. The relationship between particular dimensions of trust and perceptions of GM food risk is also explored, using structural equation modeling. Results suggest that trust judgments based on the perception of shared values are most important in relation to GM food risk, but that judgments about scientists' technical competence are also important.     

基于扎根理论的中国企业海外并购关键风险的识别研究

风险识别是中国企业海外并购风险控制的前提,也是保证海外并购成功实现的基础。由于中国特有的社会制度,中国企业的海外并购行为往往得不到东道国政府和民众的信任,这增加了中国企业海外并购的复杂性和不确定性,大大提高了风险识别的难度。为探讨中国企业在海外并购中面临哪些关键风险,论文运用扎根理论研究方法,以近年来中国企业进行的海外并购典型失败案例为研究样本,通过数据收集和译码过程,不断比较和理论抽样,构建了以"跨文化风险"为核心范畴的中国企业海外并购关键风险体系,并基于合法性视角,从国家和组织两个层面进一步解析了风险源——制度距离,从而为中国政府和企业有效进行海外并购风险防范提供了策略和建议。