Conceptualising Trust in E-Participation Contexts

  • Sabrina Scherer
  • Maria A. Wimmer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8654)


Citizen engagement in political discourse and in democratic decision-making via innovative online means (coined e-participation) has become subject of considerable research over the past decade. However, mass engagement of citizens in online consultation and decision-making contexts remains an unsatisfied expectation. In this paper, we investigate trust as a particular aspect that might influence whether a citizen will participate. Trust is perceived as a complex construct, which is subject of research in distinct research disciplines. To identify and implement measures for increasing trust as well as for minimising distrust in e-participation endeavours, relevant trust relationships have to be analysed to understand implications of using or not using e-participation offers. In this paper, the status of current research of trust in citizen participation supported by electronic means is investigated. The literature review unveils that various implications of trust in the context of e-participation are still not researched well. Existing studies investigate particular aspects of trust. Yet, no conceptualisation of a trust model is available that explains the full scope of trust in e participation contexts. Hence this paper puts forward such a trust model for e participation, which builds on the Integrative Model of Trust in Organisational Settings by Mayer, Davis and Schoorman (1995) and the Interdisciplinary Model of Trust Constructs by McKnight and Chervany (2001).


e-participation participation trust trust model 


  1. 1.
    Coleman, S., Götze, J.: Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation. Hansard Society (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grimmelikhuijsen, S.G., Meijer, A.J.: Effects of Transparency on the Perceived Trustworthiness of a Government O organisation: Evidence from an Online Experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 24, 137–157 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Im, T., Cho, W., Porumbescu, G., Park, J.: Internet, Trust in Government, and Citizen Compliance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim, S., Lee, J.: E-participation, transparency, and trust in local government. Public Administration Review 72, 819–828 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Seligson, M.A.: Trust, efficacy and modes of political participation: a study of Costa Rican peasants. British Journal of Political Science 10, 75–98 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Uslaner, E.M., Brown, M.: Inequality, trust, and civic engagement. American Politics Research 33, 868–894 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Saebo, O., Rose, J., Flak, L.S.: The shape of eParticipation: characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly 25, 400–428 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blind, P.K.: Building Trust in Government in the Twenty-First Century: Review of Literature and Emerging Issues. In: 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government Building Trust in Government, pp. 26–29 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luhmann, N.: Vertrautheit, Zuversicht, Vertrauen: Probleme und Alternativen. In: Hartmann, M., Offe, C. (eds.) Vertrauen–Die Grundlage des sozialen Zusammenhalts, pp. 143–160. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luhmann, N.: Vertrauen: Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexität. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart (1973)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D.: An Integrative Model of O organisational Trust. The Academy of Management Review 20, 709–734 (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McKnight, D.H., Chervany, N.L.: Trust and Distrust Definitions: One Bite at a Time. In: Falcone, R., Singh, M., Tan, Y.-H. (eds.) AA-WS 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2246, pp. 27–54. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lewis, J.D., Weigert, A.: Trust as a Social Reality. Social Forces 63, 967–985 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McKnight, D.H., Chervany, N.L.: What Trust Means in E-Commerce Customer Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Conceptual Typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6, 35–59 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bannister, F., Connolly, R.: Trust and transformational government: A proposed framework for research. Government Information Quarterly 28, 137–147 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hartmann, M.: Die Praxis des Vertrauens. Surkamp Verlag, Berlin (1994)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petermann, F.: Psychologie des Vertrauens. Hogrefe-Verlag, Göttingen (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seligman, A.B.: The problem of trust. Princeton University Press, Boulder (1997)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Papadopoulou, P., Nikolaidou, M., Martakos, D.: What is trust in e-government? a proposed typology. In: 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 1–10. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schoorman, F.D., Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H.: Editor’s forum - An integrative model of organisational trust: past, present and future. Academy of Management Review 32, 344–354 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Knight, D.H.M., Chervany, N.L.: Reflections on an initial trust-building model. Handbook of trust research, p. 29. Edward Elgar Publishing (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McKnight, D.H., Cummings, L.L., Chervany, N.L.: Initial trust formation in new organisational relationships. Academy of Management Review 23, 473–490 (1998)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Akkaya, C., Obermeier, M., Wolf, P., Krcmar, H.: Components of Trust Influencing eGovernment Adoption in Germany. In: Janssen, M., Scholl, H.J., Wimmer, M.A., Tan, Y.-h. (eds.) EGOV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6846, pp. 88–99. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang, X., Wan Wart, M.: When public participation in administration leads to trust: An empirical assessment of managers’ perceptions. Public Administration Review 67, 265–278 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Veit, D., Parasie, N., Schoppé, F.: Bürgernahes Regieren: Lässt sich politische Beteiligung durch E-Participation Anwendungen verbessern? In: Schumann, M., Kolbe, L.M., Breitner, M.H., Frerichs, A. (eds.) Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik 2010, Universitätsverlag Göttingen, pp. 1343–1355 (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee, J., Kim, S.: Active Citizen E-Participation in Local Governance: Do Individual Social Capital and E-Participation Management Matter? In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-47) (2014)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dutton, W.H., Shepherd, A.: Trust in the Internet: The Social Dynamics of an Experience Technology. Oxford Internet Institute University of Oxford (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Albrecht, S., Kohlrausch, N., Kubicek, H., Lippa, B., Märker, O., Trénel, M., Vorwerk, V., Westholm, H., Wiedwald, C.: eParticipation - electronic participation of citizens and the business community in eGovernment. Study on Behalf of the Federal Ministry of the Interior (Germany) conducted by IFIB Bremen GmbH and Zebralog GmbH (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lankton, N.K., McKnight, D.H.: What Does it Mean to Trust Facebook? Examining Technology and Interpersonal Trust Beliefs. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems 42, 32–54 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Macintosh, A., Whyte, A.: Towards an evaluation framework for eParticipation. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 2, 16–30 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Macintosh, A.: Characterizing e-participation in policy-making. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 10–19. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabrina Scherer
    • 1
  • Maria A. Wimmer
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Koblenz-LandauGermany

Personalised recommendations