TY - JOUR
T1 - Status, identity, and ability in the formation of trust
AU - Robbins, Blaine G.
N1 - Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Partial support for this research came from a Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development research infrastructure grant to the Center for Studies in Demography and Ecology at the University of Washington (R24 HD042828). This research was also supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (SES-1303577), which bears no responsibility for the analysis and interpretations drawn here.
Funding Information:
The author thanks Maria Grigoryeva, Edgar Kiser, Ross Matsueda, Jerald Herting, Darryl Holman, and Steven Pfaff for comments and suggestions; Richard Callahan for coding assistance; and the Department of Sociology and the Graduate School at the University of Washington for funding and software support.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, © The Author(s) 2017.
PY - 2017/11/1
Y1 - 2017/11/1
N2 - The sources of trust—or actor A’s belief about actor B’s trustworthiness with respect to particular matter Y—are myriad, ranging from the biological to the political. Despite the great amount of research that has investigated decision making as a function of another’s ascribed and achieved characteristics, we still know little about whether and to what extent these characteristics impact A’s trust in B regarding matter Y. In this article, I draw on classic sociological traditions—status characteristics theory and social identity theory—to formulate hypotheses that link ascribed and achieved characteristics to trust. Four survey experiments administered to Amazon.com Mechanical Turk workers (N = 1388 and N = 1419) and to public university undergraduate students (N = 995 and N = 956) showed that diffuse status characteristics (age, race, and gender) and social identities (co-age, co-race, and co-gender) produced weak to null effects depending on the population, hypothetical scenario, and nominal social category under study, while specific status characteristics (actual competence) consistently produced modest effects. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.
AB - The sources of trust—or actor A’s belief about actor B’s trustworthiness with respect to particular matter Y—are myriad, ranging from the biological to the political. Despite the great amount of research that has investigated decision making as a function of another’s ascribed and achieved characteristics, we still know little about whether and to what extent these characteristics impact A’s trust in B regarding matter Y. In this article, I draw on classic sociological traditions—status characteristics theory and social identity theory—to formulate hypotheses that link ascribed and achieved characteristics to trust. Four survey experiments administered to Amazon.com Mechanical Turk workers (N = 1388 and N = 1419) and to public university undergraduate students (N = 995 and N = 956) showed that diffuse status characteristics (age, race, and gender) and social identities (co-age, co-race, and co-gender) produced weak to null effects depending on the population, hypothetical scenario, and nominal social category under study, while specific status characteristics (actual competence) consistently produced modest effects. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.
KW - Achieved characteristics
KW - ascribed characteristics
KW - social identity theory
KW - status characteristics theory
KW - survey experiment
KW - trust
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85033780100&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85033780100&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1043463117734179
DO - 10.1177/1043463117734179
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85033780100
SN - 1043-4631
VL - 29
SP - 408
EP - 448
JO - Rationality and Society
JF - Rationality and Society
IS - 4
ER -