Trust in Acquaintances, Strangers and Institutions among Individuals of Different Socioeconomic Statuses during Public Health Emergencies: The Moderation of Family Structure and Policy Perception
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Research Hypothesis
2.1. The Conceptualization of Trust
2.2. The Risk Situation: A Risk Perspective on Public Health Emergencies
2.3. The Traits of Parties Involved: The Socioeconomic Status of Trusting Parties and the Plurality of Trusted Parties
2.3.1. The Plurality of Trusted Parties
2.3.2. The Effect of an Individual’s Socioeconomic Status
2.4. The Trust Formation Mechanism
3. Research Methods
3.1. Data Source
3.2. Measurement of Variables
3.2.1. Dependent Variable
3.2.2. Independent Variables
3.2.3. Moderating Variables
3.2.4. Control Variables
3.3. Data Analysis Methods
4. Results
4.1. Analysis of Factors Influencing Trust
4.2. Moderating Effects of Family Structure and Epidemic Prevention Policy Perception
5. Discussion
5.1. Individual’s Socioeconomic Status Predicts Trust
5.2. Moderating Effects of Epidemic Prevention Policy Perception and Family Structure
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wu, C.; Bierman, A.; Schieman, S. Socioeconomic Stratification and Trajectories of Social Trust during COVID-19. Soc. Sci. Res. 2022, 108, 102750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Makridis, C.A.; Wu, C. How Social Capital Helps Communities Weather the COVID-19 Pandemic. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0245135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, H.; Long, Q.; Huang, G.; Huang, L.; Luo, S. Different Roles of Interpersonal Trust and Institutional Trust in COVID-19 Pandemic Control. Soc. Sci. Med. 2022, 293, 114677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ye, M.; Lyu, Z. Trust, Risk Perception, and COVID-19 Infections: Evidence from Multilevel Analyses of Combined Original Data Set in China. Soc. Sci. Med. 2020, 265, 113517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delhey, J.; Newton, K. Predicting Cross-national Levels of Social Trust: Global Pattern or Nordic Exceptionalism? Eur. Sociol. Rev. 2005, 21, 311–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Groeniger, J.; Noordzij, K.; van der Waal, J.; de Koster, W. Dutch COVID-19 Lockdown Measures Increased Trust in Government and Trust in Science: A Difference-in-Differences Analysis. Soc. Sci. Med. 2021, 275, 113819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mishler, W.; Rose, R. What are the Origins of Political Trust? Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-communist Societies. Comp. Political Stud. 2001, 34, 30–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Isupova, O. Trust, Responsibility, and Freedom: Focus-Group Research on Contemporary Patterns of Union Formation in Russia. Demogr. Res. 2015, 32, 341–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, H. Analysis of BBC and Other British Media Coverage of China During the Outbreak. Chin. J. Radio Telev. 2020, 8, 19–23. [Google Scholar]
- Hua, J.; Shaw, R. Corona Virus (COVID-19) “Infodemic” and Emerging Issues Through a Data Lens: The Case of China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2020, 17, 2309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fetzer, T.; Hensel, L.; Hermle, J.; Roth, C. Coronavirus Perceptions and Economic Anxiety. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2021, 103, 968–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bol, D.; Giani, M.; Blais, A.; Loewen, P.J. The Effect of COVID-19 Lockdowns on Political Support: Some Good News for Democracy? Eur. J. Polit. Res. 2020, 60, 497–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, M.; Guo, W. Subjective Distress about COVID-19 and Its Social Correlates: Empirical Evidence from Hubei Province of China. J. Affect. Disord. 2021, 289, 46–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rousseau, D.M.; Sitkin, S.B. Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View of Trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1998, 23, 393–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, R.C.; Davis, J.H.; Schoorman, F.D. An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 709–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morgan, R.M.; Hunt, S.D. The Commitment Theory of Relationship Marketing. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 20–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishnan, R.; Martin, X.; Noorderhaven, N.G. When Does Trust Matter to Alliance Performance? Acad. Manag. J. 2006, 49, 894–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luhmann, N. Trust and Power; Wiley: Chichester, UK, 1979. [Google Scholar]
- Esaiasson, P.; Sohlberg, J.; Ghersetti, M.; Johansson, B. How the Coronavirus Crisis Affects Citizen Trust in Institutions and in Unknown Others: Evidence from ‘The Swedish Experiment’. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 2020, 60, 748–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fei, X.T. Countryside China; Beijing University Press: Beijing, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Wei, X.F.; Pan, D.N. Analysis of Social Exchange Behavior and Interpersonal Relationship. Soc. Sci. 2006, 1, 6–7. [Google Scholar]
- He, Y.L.; Wang, G.L. Government in China: A Comparison and Reflection. Open Times 2012, 6, 83–97. [Google Scholar]
- Ding, C.M.; Zhang, L.; Wang, C. Income Gap and Social Trust in the Context of Transition. Econ. Manag. Rev. 2020, 36, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brandt, M.J.; Wetherell, G.; Henry, P.J. Changes in Income Predict Change in Social Trust: A Longitudinal Analysis. Polit. Psychol. 2014, 36, 761–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alesina, A.; La Ferrara, E. Who Trusts Others? J. Public. Econ. 2002, 85, 207–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ross, C.R.; Mirowsky, J.; Pribesh, S. Powerlessness and the Amplification of Threat: Neighborhood Disadvantage, Disorder, and Mistrust. Am. Sociol. Rev. 2001, 66, 568–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charron, N.; Rothstein, B. Does Education Lead to Higher Generalized Trust? The Importance of Quality of Government. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 2016, 50, 59–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gambetta, D.; Morisi, D. COVID-19 Infection Induces Higher Trust in Strangers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2116818119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lo Iacono, S.; Przepiorka, W.; Buskens, V.; Corten, R.; van de Rijt, A. COVID-19 Vulnerability and Perceived Norm Violations Predict Loss of Social Trust: A Pre-post Study. Soc. Sci. Med. 2021, 291, 114513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zuker, L.G. Production of Trust: Institutional Sources of Economic Structure, 1840–1920. Res. Organ. Behav. 1986, 8, 53–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Whitley, R.D. The Social Construction of Business Systems in East Asia. Organ. Stud. 1991, 12, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, S.Q. Relationships and Trust: A Local Study of Interpersonal Trust among Chinese People, Annals of Chinese Sociology (1995~1998); Social Science Literature Press: Beijing, China, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Wellman, B.; Wortley, S. Different Strokes from Difference Folks: Community Ties and Social Support. Am. J. Sociol. 1990, 96, 558–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fukuyama, F. Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity; Guo, H., Ed.; Guangxi Normal University Press: Guilin, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, S.L.; Manning, W.D.; Stykes, B. Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Integrating Family Complexity. J. Marriage Fam. 2015, 77, 177–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shen, G.; Zhang, C. Income Disparity, Social Divergence and Social Trust. Comp. Econ. Soc. Syst. 2016, 1, 121–136. [Google Scholar]
- Peng, S.Q. Mechanisms of Trust Building: Relational Operations and Legal Instruments. Sociol. Res. 1999, 2, 55–68. [Google Scholar]
- Johnson, D.R.; Creech, J.C. Ordinal Measures in Multiple Indicator Models: A Simulation Study of Categorization Error. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1983, 48, 398–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norman, G. Likert Scales, Levels of Measurement and the “Laws” of Statistics. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. Theory Pract. 2010, 15, 625–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sullivan, G.M.; Artino, A.R. Analyzing and Interpreting Data from Likert-Type Scales. J. Grad. Med. Educ. 2013, 5, 541–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zumbo, B.D.; Zimmerman, D.W. Is the Selection of Statistical Methods Governed by Level of Measurement? Can. Psychol. 1993, 34, 390–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shavers, V.L. Measurement of Socioeconomic Status in Health Disparities Research. J. Natl. Med. Assoc. 2007, 99, 1013–1023. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- Im, T.; Cho, W.; Porumbescu, G.; Park, J. Internet, Trust in Government, and Citizen Compliance. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 2012, 24, 741–763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kye, B.; Hwang, S.J. Social Trust in the Midst of Pandemic Crisis: Implications from COVID-19 of South Korea. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 2020, 68, 100523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variables | Values | Sample Size | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 3383 | 61.6 |
Female | 2111 | 38.4 | |
Age | ≤20 | 519 | 9.4 |
21–30 | 2335 | 42.5 | |
31–40 | 1819 | 33.1 | |
41–50 | 649 | 11.8 | |
51–60 | 146 | 2.7 | |
>60 | 26 | 0.5 | |
Place of residence | Urban | 4247 | 77.3 |
Rural | 1247 | 22.7 | |
Political affiliation | Communist Party member | 1645 | 29.9 |
Non-Communist Party member | 3849 | 70.1 | |
Education | Elementary school and below | 203 | 3.7 |
Middle school | 399 | 7.3 | |
High school (vocational school) | 1375 | 25.0 | |
Junior colleges | 1270 | 23.1 | |
University and above | 2247 | 40.9 | |
Occupation | Public sector unit | 2352 | 42.8 |
Private enterprise | 2114 | 38.5 | |
Social organization | 545 | 9.9 | |
Others | 483 | 8.8 | |
Marital status | Not Married | 2256 | 41.1 |
Married | 3238 | 58.9 | |
Family size | Family members | 5494 | 3.69 # |
Policy perception | Not strict at all | 245 | 4.5 |
Not too strict | 263 | 4.8 | |
Fair | 517 | 9.4 | |
Fairly strict | 1668 | 30.4 | |
Very strict | 2801 | 51.0 |
Education | Income | Family Size | Policy Perception | Acquaintance Trust | Stranger Trust | Institution Trust | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Education | 1.000 | ||||||
Income | 0.334 *** | 1.000 | |||||
Family size | 0.029 * | 0.081 *** | 1.000 | ||||
Policy perception | 0.182 *** | 0.132 *** | 0.045 *** | 1.000 | |||
Acquaintance trust | 0.076 *** | 0.049 *** | 0.048 *** | 0.165 *** | 1.000 | ||
Stranger trust | 0.029 * | 0.005 | 0.063 *** | 0.119 *** | 0.683 *** | 1.000 | |
Institution trust | 0.158 *** | 0.099 *** | 0.049 *** | 0.375 *** | 0.466 *** | 0.486 *** | 1.000 |
Acquaintance Trust | Stranger Trust | Institution Trust | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
Control variables | |||||||||
Gender (female = 0) | −0.048 *** | −0.050 *** | −0.041 ** | −0.059 *** | −0.059 *** | −0.051 *** | −0.044 ** | −0.047 ** | −0.035 ** |
Age | 0.081 *** | 0.076 *** | 0.041 ** | −0.009 | −0.010 | −0.039 ** | 0.136 *** | 0.127 *** | 0.079 *** |
Place of residence (rural = 0) | 0.020 | 0.001 | 0.004 | −0.006 | −0.019 | −0.016 | 0.024 | 0.010 | −0.004 |
Political affiliation | 0.019 | 0.002 | 0.010 | −0.003 | −0.013 | −0.006 | −0.012 | −0.037 * | −0.016 |
Independent variables (socioeconomic status) | |||||||||
Education | 0.059 *** | 0.032 * | 0.032 * | 0.008 | 0.141 *** | 0.082 *** | |||
Income (lower = 0) | 0.024 | 0.004 | −0.004 | −0.022 | 0.057 *** | 0.021 | |||
Occupation (public sector unit) | |||||||||
Private enterprise | −0.018 | −0.026 | −0.023 | −0.030 | 0.019 | 0.004 | |||
Social organization | 0.023 | 0.026 | 0.051 *** | 0.052 *** | −0.043 ** | −0.033 * | |||
Others | −0.032 * | −0.034 * | −0.037 * | −0.040 ** | −0.001 | −0.015 | |||
Other variables | |||||||||
Family structure | |||||||||
Marital status (not married = 0) | 0.046 ** | 0.035 * | 0.008 | ||||||
Family size | 0.034 * | 0.055 *** | 0.029 * | ||||||
Policy perception | 0.152 *** | 0.125 *** | 0.341 *** | ||||||
F test | 15.138 *** | 10.779 *** | 20.011 *** | 4.592 ** | 5.491 *** | 12.734 *** | 29.689 *** | 30.399 *** | 81.084 *** |
Acquaintance Trust | Stranger Trust | Institution Trust | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | |
Control variables | ||||||||||||
Gender (female = 0) | −0.050 ** | −0.048 *** | −0.048 ** | −0.045 *** | −0.059 *** | −0.057 ** | −0.058 *** | −0.055 *** | −0.047 ** | −0.047 ** | −0.046 ** | −0.036 ** |
Age | 0.076 *** | 0.061 *** | 0.075 *** | 0.055 *** | −0.010 | −0.021 | −0.011 | −0.029 * | 0.127 *** | 0.127 *** | 0.126 *** | 0.082 *** |
Place of residence (rural = 0) | 0.001 | −0.001 | 0.001 | 0.006 | −0.019 | −0.020 | −0.018 | −0.014 | −0.010 | −0.012 | −0.009 | −0.005 |
Political affiliation | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.015 | −0.013 | −0.013 | −0.014 | 0.001 | −0.037 * | −0.040 ** | −0.035 ** | −0.016 |
Independent variables (socioeconomic status) | ||||||||||||
Education | 0.059 *** | 0.071 *** | 0.059 *** | 0.025 | 0.032 * | 0.042 * | 0.032 * | −0.004 | 0.141 *** | 0.118 *** | 0.0137 *** | 0.084 *** |
Income (lower = 0) | 0.024 | −0.013 | 0.021 | 0.008 | −0.004 | −0.019 | −0.009 | −0.014 | 0.057 *** | 0.036 | 0.054 *** | 0.018 |
Occupation (public sector unit) | ||||||||||||
Private enterprise | −0.018 | −0.026 | −0.020 | −0.027 | −0.023 | −0.041 | −0.025 | −0.031 * | 0.019 | 0.030 | 0.017 | 0.006 |
Social organization | 0.023 | 0.046 * | 0.022 | 0.026 | 0.051 *** | 0.050 * | 0.048 ** | 0.054 *** | −0.043 ** | −0.027 | −0.045 ** | −0.035 * |
Others | −0.032 * | −0.019 | −0.032 * | −0.039 ** | −0.037 * | −0.022 | −0.037 * | −0.046 ** | −0.001 | 0.013 | −0.002 | −0.014 |
Moderating variables | ||||||||||||
Family structure | ||||||||||||
In a marriage | 0.032 | 0.023 | 0.006 | |||||||||
In a marriage×education | −0.024 | −0.019 | 0.042 * | |||||||||
In a marriage × income | 0.049 * | 0.018 | 0.025 | |||||||||
In a marriage × private enterprise | 0.011 | 0.026 | −0.011 | |||||||||
In a marriage × social organization | −0.031 | −0.001 | −0.017 | |||||||||
In a marriage × others | −0.016 | −0.022 | −0.019 | |||||||||
Family size | 0.034 | 0.048 | 0.069 ** | |||||||||
Family size × education | 0.011 | 0.012 | −0.020 | |||||||||
Family size × income | −0.007 | 0.010 | −0.030 | |||||||||
Family size × private enterprise | 0.027 | 0.011 | −0.013 | |||||||||
Family size × social organization | −0.002 | 0.007 | −0.019 | |||||||||
Family size × others | −0.002 | 0.003 | −0.006 | |||||||||
Policy perception | 0.094 *** | 0.086 *** | 0.335 *** | |||||||||
Policy perception × education | −0.043 ** | −0.057 *** | 0.002 | |||||||||
Policy perception × income | 0.036 * | 0.012 | 0.033 * | |||||||||
Policy perception × private enterprise | 0.056 *** | 0.030 | 0.005 | |||||||||
Policy perception × social organization | 0.002 | 0.018 | −0.034 * | |||||||||
Policy perception × others | −0.006 | −0.004 | −0.001 | |||||||||
F test | 10.779 *** | 7.667 *** | 7.366 *** | 16.468 ** | 5.491 *** | 3.985 *** | 4.714 *** | 9.794 *** | 30.399 ** | 18.985 ** | 19.244 ** | 65.376 *** |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Li, X.; Sun, X.; Shao, Q. Trust in Acquaintances, Strangers and Institutions among Individuals of Different Socioeconomic Statuses during Public Health Emergencies: The Moderation of Family Structure and Policy Perception. Behav. Sci. 2024, 14, 404. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14050404
Li X, Sun X, Shao Q. Trust in Acquaintances, Strangers and Institutions among Individuals of Different Socioeconomic Statuses during Public Health Emergencies: The Moderation of Family Structure and Policy Perception. Behavioral Sciences. 2024; 14(5):404. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14050404
Chicago/Turabian StyleLi, Xueyan, Xiaoli Sun, and Qianqian Shao. 2024. "Trust in Acquaintances, Strangers and Institutions among Individuals of Different Socioeconomic Statuses during Public Health Emergencies: The Moderation of Family Structure and Policy Perception" Behavioral Sciences 14, no. 5: 404. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14050404