Abstract
In academic debate, trust is modeled either as a state or as a relation between trustee and trustor. This chapter systematizes a number of key features that influence the process of trust in order to make visible the tasks of future research. It discusses the differentiation of objects of trust (system, organization, role holders, and performance or product). The various factors pertaining to the trustee that influence the trustee’s trustworthiness are presented. With reference to knowledge and experiences, personality features, situational features, and the differentiation of various communication situations, the chapter describes which elements pertaining to the trustor influence trust. Trust only becomes risky when it manifests itself in the form of an action. Only a person who acts risks something and makes himself or herself vulnerable and dependent on the trustee. The chapter explains what effects digitalization has on the development of trust. On the one hand, digital possibilities for developing equivalents of trust are opening up; on the other hand, trustees have to find new forms of presenting their trustworthiness.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ARD/ZDF-Onlinestudie. (2015). http://www.ard-zdf-onlinestudie.de/
Arpan, L. M., & Raney, A. A. (2003). An experimental investigation of news source and the hostile media effect. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(2), 265–281.
Ashley, S., Poepsel, M., & Willis, E. (2010). Media literacy and news credibility: Does knowledge of media ownership increase skepticism in news consumers? Journal of Media Literacy Education, 2(1), 37–46.
Bachmann, R., & Zaheer, A. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of advances in trust research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Blöbaum, B. (2014). Trust and journalism in a digital environment (Working paper). Accessed April 30, 2015, from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Trust%20and%20Journalism%20in%20a%20Digital%20Environment.pdf
Boon, S. D., & Holmes, J. G. (1991). The dynamics of interpersonal trust: Resolving uncertainty in the face of risk. In R. A. Hinde & J. Groebel (Eds.), Cooperation and prosocial behaviour (pp. 190–211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Butler, J. K. (1991). Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of conditions of trust inventory. Journal of Management, 17, 643–663. doi:10.1177/014920639101700307.
Castelfranchi, C., & Falcone, R. (2000). Trust and control: A dialectic link. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 14, 799–823. doi:10.1080/08839510050127560.
Childs, S. (2004). Developing health website quality assessment guidelines for the voluntary sector: Outcomes from the judge project. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 21(s2), 14–26.
Corritore, C. L., Kracher, B., & Wiedenbeck, S. (2003). On-line trust: Concepts, evolving themes, a model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(6), 737–758.
Damm, D. J. L. (2012). Medien-Reputation und Quellenzugang. In K.-D. Altmeppen & R. Greck (Eds.), Facetten des Journalismus (pp. 143–167). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (2004). The risk-based view of trust: A conceptual framework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(1), 85–116.
Dietz, G., & Hartog, D. N. D. (2006). Measuring trust inside organisations. Personnel Review, 35(5), 557–588.
Eisenegger, M., & Imhof, K. (2009). Funktionale, soziale und expressive Reputation–Grundzüge einer Reputationstheorie. In U. Roettger (Ed.), Theorien der Public Relations (pp. 243–264). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Eurobarometer. (2015). http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2000). Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 515–540. doi:10.1177/107769900007700304.
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2007). The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media & Society, 9, 319–342. doi:10.1177/1461444807075015.
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2008). Digital media and youth: Unparalleled opportunity and unprecedented responsibility. In The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. doi:10.1162/dmal.9780262562324.005.
Frevert, U. (2013). Vertrauensfragen: Eine Obsession der Moderne. Munich: CH Beck.
Fulmer, C. A., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012). At what level (and in whom) we trust: Trust across multiple organizational levels. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1167–1230.
Giddens, A. (1997). Konsequenzen der Moderne. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main.
Giffin, K. (1967). The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological Bulletin, 68(2), 104–120.
Good, D. (1988). Individuals, interpersonal relations, and trust. In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relationships (pp. 131–185). New York: Basil Blackwell.
Gronke, P., & Cook, T. E. (2007). Disdaining the media: The American public’s changing attitudes toward the news. Political Communication, 24(3), 259–281.
Guenther, T., & Möllering, G. (2010). A framework for studying the problem of trust in online settings. In D. Latusek & A. Gerbasi (Eds.), Trust and technology in a ubiquitous modern environment (pp. 16–33). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Gunther, A. C., & Christen, C. T. (2002). Projection or persuasive press? Contrary effects of personal opinion and perceived news coverage on estimates of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 52(1), 177–195.
Harris, P. R., Sillence, E., & Briggs, P. (2011). Perceived threat and corroboration: Key factors that improve a predictive model of trust in internet-based health information and advice. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(3).
Heintz, B. (2010). Numerische Differenz. Überlegungen zu einer Soziologie des (quantitativen) Vergleichs/Numerical difference. Toward a sociology of (quantitative) comparisons. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 39(3), 162–181.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Jackob, N. G. E. (2010). No alternatives? The relationship between perceived media dependency, use of alternative information sources, and general trust in mass media. International Journal of Communication, 18(4), 589–606.
Jackob, N. (2012). The tendency to trust as individual predisposition—Exploring the associations between interpersonal trust, trust in the media and trust in institutions. Communications, 37(1), 99–120.
Karlsson, M. (2010). Rituals of transparency: Evaluating online news outlets’ uses of transparency rituals in the United States, United Kingdom and Sweden. Journalism Studies, 11(4), 535–545.
Kelton, K., Fleischmann, K. R., & Wallace, W. A. (2008). Trust in digital information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(3), 363–374.
Kohring, M. (2004). Vertrauen in Journalismus. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft.
Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C., & Gillespie, N. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust development: Theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions. Journal of Management, 32(6), 991–1022.
Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Oxford Journal, 63, 967–985.
Lieberman, J. K. (1981). The litigious society. New York: Basic Books.
Luhmann, N. (1968). Vertrauen. Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexität. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke Verlag.
Luhmann, N. (2000). Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives. Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, 6, 94–107.
Luhmann, N. (2001). Vertrautheit, Zuversicht, Vertrauen: Probleme und Alternativen. In M. Hartmann & C. Offe (Eds.), Vertrauen. Die Grundlage des sozialen Zusammenhalts (pp. 143–160). Frankfurt: Campus.
Matthes, J. (2013). The affective underpinnings of hostile media perceptions: Exploring the distinct effects of affective and cognitive involvement. Communication Research, 40(3), 360–387.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 473–490.
Müller, J. (2013). Mechanisms of trust: News media in democratic and authoritarian regimes. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
Nienaber, A.-M., Romeike, P., Searle, R., & Schewe, G. (2015). What makes the glue sticky? A qualitative meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of trust in supervisor-subordinate relationships. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(5), 507–534.
Rabinovich, A., Morton, T. A., & Birney, M. E. (2012). Communicating climate science: The role of perceived communicator’s motives. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(1), 11–18.
Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. (2013). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2013.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Introduction to special topic forum: Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404.
Sambrook, R. (2012). Delivering trust: Impartiality and trust in the digital age. Accessed April 30, 2015, from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Delivering%20Trust%20Impartiality%20and%20Objectivity%20in%20a%20Digital%20Age.pdf
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344–354.
Schoorman, F. D., Wood, M. M., & Breuer, C. (2015). Would trust by any other name smell as sweet? Reflections on the meanings and uses of trust across disciplines and context. In B. Bornstein & A. Tomkins (Eds.), Motivating cooperation and compliance with authority (pp. 13–35). New York: Springer International Publishing.
Simmel, G. (1908/2009). Sociology: Inquiries into the construction of social forms (2 vols., A. J. Blasi, A. K. Jacobs, & M. J. Kanjirathinkal, Trans.). Leiden: Brill.
Slovic, P. (2010). The feeling of risk. New perspectives on risk perception. London: Earthscan.
Slovic, P., & Peters, E. (2006). Risk perception and affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(6), 322–325.
Solomon, L. (1960). The influence of some types of power relationships and game strategies upon the development of interpersonal trust. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61(2), 223–230.
Sztompka, P. (1999). Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsfati, Y., & Ariely, G. (2014). Individual and contextual correlates of trust in media across 44 countries. Communication Research, 41, 760–782. doi:10.1177/0093650213485972.
Ullmann-Margalit, E. (2004). Trust, distrust, and in between. In R. Hardin (Ed.), Distrust (pp. 60–82). New York: Russel Sage Publications.
Vorderer, P., & Kohring, M. (2013). Comm research—Views from Europe|Permanently online: A challenge for media and communication research. International Journal of Communication, 7, 188–196.
Vraga, E., Tully, M., Akin, H., & Rojas, H. (2012). Modifying perceptions of hostility and credibility of news coverage of an environmental controversy through media literacy. Journalism, 13, 942–959. doi:10.1177/1464884912455906.
Xie, W., & Zhao, Y. (2014). Is seeing believing? Comparing media credibility of traditional and online media in China. China Media Research, 10(3), 64.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Blöbaum, B. (2016). Key Factors in the Process of Trust. On the Analysis of Trust under Digital Conditions. In: Blöbaum, B. (eds) Trust and Communication in a Digitized World. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28059-2_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28059-2_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28057-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28059-2
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)