Abstract
Trust has been defined in a variety of ways across disciplines. The issue of defining trust becomes even more convoluted when considering linguistic variations, cultural differences, and colloquial definitions. In addition to interdisciplinary variations in trust definitions, languages vary in the vocabulary, meanings, and origins of their words for “trust.” These variations may contribute to the inconsistent and/or contradictory findings previous researchers have identified in predictors of institutional trust. The purpose of this chapter is fourfold: first we examine the philosophical issues surrounding cross-cultural conceptualizations of institutional trust by comparing intra/cross-cultural and interdisciplinary divergence in the definitions and conceptualization of institutional trust. Second, we compare cross-national findings from empirical studies to highlight important factors in institutional trust across different cultures. Third, we compare predictors of diffuse support for the highest national court in the country, as a measure of institutional trust, between Western European and Eastern European countries. In the present analysis, we examined the impact of previously identified factors important in predicting institutional trust, such as the importance of procedural and distributive justice, and the perception of corruption as an important problem, from data collected previously in a cross-national study conducted shortly after the end of communism in Eastern Europe. Finally, we close comments on the state of the field and with suggestions for future directions in cross-national research in institutional trust.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Anderson, C. J., & Tverdova, Y. V. (2003). Corruption, political allegiances, and attitudes toward government in contemporary democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 91–109.
Arnold, C., Sapir, E. V., & Zapryanova, G. (2012). Trust in the institutions of the European Union: A cross-country examination. In L. Beaudonnet, & D. Di Mauro (Eds.), Beyond Euroskepticism: Understanding attitudes towards the EU. European Integration online Papers (EIoP), 16(Special mini-issue 2).
Bornstein, B. H., & Tomkins, A. J. (Eds.) (2015). Motivating cooperation and compliance with authority: The role of institutional trust: Vol. 62nd Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. New York: Springer.
Bottoms, A., & Tankebe, J. (2012). Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 102, 119–170.
Cohn, E. S., & White, S. O. (1997). Legal socialization effects on democratization. International Social Science Journal, 152, 151–171.
Cook, T. E., & Gronke, P. (2005). The skeptical American: Revisiting the meanings of trust in government and confidence in institutions. Journal of Politics, 67, 784–803.
Currall, S. C., & Inkpen, A. C. (2006). On the complexity of organizational trust: A multi-level co-evolutionary perspective and guidelines for future research. In R. Bachmann & A. Zaheer (Eds.), Handbook of trust research (pp. 235–246). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
Fagan, J., & Piquero, A. R. (2007). Rational choice and developmental influences on recidivism among adolescent felony offenders. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4, 715–748.
Gibson, J. L. (1989). Understandings of justice: Institutional legitimacy, procedural justice, and police tolerance. Law & Society Review, 23, 469–496.
Gibson, J. L., & Caldeira, G. A. (2009). Citizens, courts, and confirmations: Positivity theory and the judgments of the American people. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gibson, J. L., Caldeira, G. A., & Baird, V. A. (1998). On the legitimacy of national high courts. American Political Science Review, 92, 343–358.
Gibson, J. L., Caldeira, G. A., & Spence, L. K. (2003). Measuring attitudes toward the United States Supreme Court. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 354–367.
Hamm, J. A., PytlikZillig, L. M., Tomkins, A. J., Herian, M. N., Bornstein, B. H., & Neeley, E. M. (2011). Exploring separable components of institutional confidence. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 29, 95–115.
Hoffman, A. M. (2002). A conceptualization of trust in international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 8, 375–401.
Hough, M., Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2013). Legitimacy, trust and compliance: An empirical test of procedural justice theory using the European Social Survey. In J. Tankebe & A. Liebling (Eds.), Legitimacy and criminal justice: An international exploration (pp. 326–352). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Inoguchi, T. (2005). The AsiaBarometer: Its origins, its principles, and its prospects. Participation, 29, 16–18.
Inoguchi, T., Mikami, S., & Fujii, S. (2007). Social capital in East Asia: Comparative political culture in Confucian societies. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 8, 409–426.
Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2009). Crime, policing and social order: On the expressive nature of public confidence in policing. The British Journal of Sociology, 60, 493–521.
Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2010). Police legitimacy: A conceptual review. Retrieved from SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1684507.
Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Kuha, J., Stares, S., Widdop, S., et al. (2011). Developing European indicators of trust in justice. European Journal of Criminology, 8, 267–285.
Jamal, A., & Nooruddin, I. (2010). The democratic utility of trust: A cross-national analysis. Journal of Politics, 72, 45–59.
Kääriäinen, J. T. (2007). Trust in the police in 16 European countries a multilevel analysis. European Journal of Criminology, 4, 409–435.
Keating, V. C., & Ruzicka, J. (2014). Trusting relationships in international politics: No need to hedge. Review of International Studies, 40, 753–770. doi:10.1017/S0260210514000059.
Kramer, R. M., & Tyler, T. R. (Eds.). (1995). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. New York: Wiley.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
Mishler, W., & Rose, R. (1997). Trust, distrust and skepticism: Popular evaluations of civil and political institutions in post-communist societies. Journal of Politics, 59, 418–451.
Möllering, G. (2006). Trust: Reason, routine, reflexivity. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Morgner, C. (2013). Trust and confidence: History, theory and socio-political implications. Human Studies, 36, 509–532. doi:10.1007/s10746-013-9281-1.
Munoz, J., Torcal, M., & Bonet, E. (2011). Institutional trust and multilevel government in the European Union: Congruence or compensation? European Union Politics, 12, 551–574.
Packer, H. L. (1973). The limits of the criminal sanction. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Bachman, R., & Sherman, L. W. (1997). Do fair procedures matter? The effects of procedural justice on spouse assault. Law & Society Review, 31, 163–204.
Pearsall, J., McPherson, F., & Holden, R. (Eds.). (2015). Oxford English dictionary online. Cambridge, England: Oxford University Press.
Peng, L. (2014). A comparative analysis of political confidence in the BRICS countries. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 15, 417–441.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404.
Seligman, A. B. (1997). The problem of trust. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sung, H. E. (2006). Democracy and criminal justice in cross-national perspective: From crime control to due process. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 311–337.
Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37, 513–547.
Tan, S. J., & Tambyah, S. K. (2011). Generalized trust and trust in institutions in Confucian Asia. Social Indicators Research, 103, 357–377.
Tankebe, J. (2010). Testing the effects of public experiences of police corruption in Ghana. British Journal of Criminology, 50, 296–319.
Tankebe, J. (2013). Viewing things differently: The dimensions of public perceptions of police legitimacy. Criminology, 51, 103–135.
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. New York: Russell Sage.
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.
Williamson, O. E. (1993). Calculativeness, trust and economic organization. Journal of Law and Economics, 30, 131–145.
Wong, T. K., Wan, P., & Hsiao, H. M. (2011). The bases of political trust in six Asian societies: Institutional and cultural explanation compared. International Political Science Review, 32, 263–281.
Zmerli, S., Newton, K., & Montero, J. R. (2007). Trust in people, confidence in political institutions, and satisfaction with democracy. In J. W. van Deth, J. R. Montero, & A. Westholm (Eds.), Citizenship and involvement in European democracies: A comparative analysis (pp. 35–65). London: Routledge.
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
Cole, L.M., Cohn, E.S. (2016). Institutional Trust Across Cultures: Its Definitions, Conceptualizations, and Antecedents Across Eastern and Western European Nations. 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_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22261-5_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22260-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22261-5
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)