Skip to main content

Abstract

During the later half of the twenty-first century, conceptions of authority have been dominated by instrumentalist-based models. However, as society has seen a shift from compliance to cooperation, the instrumentalist model does not seem to explain why people cooperate. This shift has led to a motive-based model, which focuses largely on trust. Trust seems to be a motivating factor in explaining cooperation, particularly in that it motivates people to engage in actions, institutions to have discretion to take actions, and authorities to motivate actions. However, while there are clear implications for cooperation from a lack of trust, there may in fact be a dark side of trust in that it serves in the system justification process. There is of increasing importance to understand trust and the approaches in doing so have been vast—theory based, empirical, and behavior prediction. This timely volume makes an important contribution to the growing literature of trust, but many questions are left unanswered, such as what is the difference between institutional and personal trust and do institutions have motives? These questions as well as the many others posed within this volume will govern future social science discourse because of trust’s clear role in the effectiveness of legal and political systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, D. (1991). The legitimation of power. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., & Nagin, D. (Eds.). (1978). Deterrence and incapacitation: Estimating the effects of criminal sanctions on crime rates. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottoms, A., & Von Hirsch, A. (2010). The crime preventive impact of penal sanctions. In P. Cane & H. Kritzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of empirical legal research (pp. 96–124). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 909–927.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nauta, A. (2009). Self-interest and other-orientation in organizational behavior: Implications for job performance, prosocial behavior, and personal initiative. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 913–926.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grunefeld, D. H., Inesi, M. E., Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, G. D., Jr., Mitra, A., Gupta, N., & Shaw, J. D. (1998). Are financial incentives related to performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 777–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265–284.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G., & Pinder, C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485–516.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., & Cullen, F. T. (2007). The effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation: A review of systematic reviews. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3, 297–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCoun, R. (1993). Drugs and the law: A psychological analysis of drug prohibition. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 497–512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCord, J., Widom, C. S., & Crowell, N. A. (2001). Juvenile crime, juvenile justice. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munchinsky, P. M. (2012). Psychology applied to work. Summerfield, NC: Hypergraph Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagin, D. (1998). Criminal deterrence research at the outset of the twenty-first century. Crime and Justice, 23, 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagin, D. S., & Pepper, J. V. (Eds.). (2012). Deterrence and the death penalty. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neal, T. M. S., Shockley, E., & Schilke, O. (2016). The “dark side” of institutional trust. In E. Shockley, T. M. S. Neal, L. M. PytlikZillig, & B. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on trust: Towards theoretical and methodological integration. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paternoster, R. (2006). How much do we really know about criminal deterrence? The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 100, 765–824.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piquero, A. R., Paternoster, R., Pogarsky, G., & Loughran, T. (2011). Elaborating the individual difference component in deterrence theory. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 7, 335–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., Bommer, W. H., Podsakoff, N. P., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Relationships between leader reward and punishment behavior and subordinate attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 113–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, T. C., Cullen, F. T., Blevens, K. R., Daigle, L. E., & Madensen, T. D. (2008). The empirical status of deterrence theory: A meta-analysis. In F. T. Cullen, J. P. Wright, & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (pp. 367–396). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • PytlikZillig, L. M., & Kimbrough, C. D. (2016). Consensus on conceptualizations and definitions of trust: Are we there yet? In E. Shockley, T. M. S. Neal, L. M. PytlikZillig, & B. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on trust: Towards theoretical and methodological integration. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leither (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 10–24). New York: Psychological Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2006a). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 375–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2006b). Why people obey the law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2011). Why people cooperate. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2012). Justice and effective cooperation. Social Justice Research, 25, 355–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Degoey, P. (1996). Trust in organizational authorities. In R. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 331–356). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. New York: Russell-Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2014). Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: Motivating compliance, cooperation, and engagement. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20, 78–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Kramer, R. (1996). Whither trust? In R. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 1–15). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Uslaner, E. M. (2016). Who Do You Trust? In E. Shockley, T. M. S. Neal, L. M. PytlikZillig, & B. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on trust: Towards theoretical and methodological integration. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, G. M. (2014). The new science of wise psychological interventions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. (2005). The death penalty meets social science: Deterrence and jury behavior under new scrutiny. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1, 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, M., & Anderson, N. (1996). Innovation in top management teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 680–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Paternoster, R. (2004). Does the perceived risk of punishment deter criminally prone individuals? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41, 180–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom R. Tyler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tyler, T.R. (2016). Trust in the Twenty-First Century. In: Shockley, E., Neal, T., PytlikZillig, L., Bornstein, B. (eds) Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Trust. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22261-5_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics