Handbook of Research Methods on Trust
Show Less

Handbook of Research Methods on Trust

Edited by Fergus Lyon, Guido Möllering and Mark N.K. Saunders

The Handbook of Research Methods on Trust provides an authoritative in-depth consideration of quantitative and qualitative methods for empirical study of trust in the social sciences. As this topic has matured, a growing number of practical approaches and techniques has been utilised across the broad, multidisciplinary community of trust research, providing both insights and challenges. This unique Handbook draws together a wealth of research methods knowledge gained by trust researchers into one essential volume. The contributors examine different methodological issues and particular methods, as well as share their experiences of what works, what does not work, challenges and innovations.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 7: Measuring Generalized Trust: In Defense of the ‘Standard’ Question

Eric M. Uslaner


1 Eric M. Uslaner INTRODUCTION This chapter reviews several key issues in the measurement of generalized trust: whether to include a single measure or multiple items, whether to measure trust as a dichotomy or on a scale with more values, what trust means in different cultures and languages, and whether trust means the same thing at the aggregate and individual levels. The measurement of interpersonal trust has been as controversial as the debate over what trust means and what shapes faith in others. I review some of the controversies about the measurement of trust and offer evidence in defense of the ‘standard’ question in research on generalized trust: ‘Generally speaking, do you believe that most people can be trusted or can’t you be too careful in dealing with people?’ The standard question was first formulated by Elisabeth NoelleNeumann in Germany in 1948. Morris Rosenberg expanded the measure of college students in the United States in 1956 by creating a misanthropy scale that includes trust and the perceptions that people are fair and helpful (Zmerli and Newton, 2008). It has now become common for researchers to use the misanthropy scale as a measure of ‘trust.’ Is ‘misanthropy’ the same as trust? Beyond the issue of whether the deity of ‘trust’ is one or three, there are controversies over what the standard question means, whether the traditional dichotomy (trust versus being careful) captures the range of variation in people’s faith in others, and how best to measure trust. I consider each...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.