Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-plzwj Total loading time: 0.273 Render date: 2022-05-23T06:01:24.395Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

The Political Relevance of Political Trust

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Marc J. Hetherington*
Affiliation:
Bowdoin College

Abstract

Scholars have debated the importance of declining political trust to the American political system. By primarily treating trust as a dependent variable, however, scholars have systematically underestimated its relevance. This study establishes the importance of trust by demonstrating that it is simultaneously related to measures of both specific and diffuse support. In fact, trust's effect on feelings about the incumbent president, a measure of specific support, is even stronger than the reverse. This provides a fundamentally different understanding of the importance of declining political trust in recent years. Rather than simply a reflection of dissatisfaction with political leaders, declining trust is a powerful cause of this dissatisfaction. Low trust helps create a political environment in which it is more difficult for leaders to succeed.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramson, Paul R. 1983. Political Attitudes in America: Formation and Change. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Abramson, Paul R., Aldrich, John H., and Rhode, David W.. 1998. Change and Continuity in the 1996 Elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Abramson, Paul R., and Finifter, Ada W.. 1981. “On the Meaning of Political Trust: New Evidence from Items Introduced in 1978.” American Journal of Political Science 25(May):297307.10.2307/2110854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bower, Robert T. 1985. The Changing Television Audience in America. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Brody, Richard A. 1991. Assessing the President: The Media, Elite Opinion, and Public Support. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Gibson, James L.. 1992. “The Etiology of Public Support for the Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 36(August):635–64.10.2307/2111585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Citrin, Jack. 1974. “Comment: The Political Relevance of Trust in Government.” American Political Science Review 68(September): 973–88.10.2307/1959141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citrin, Jack. 1996. “Who's the Boss? Direct Democracy and Popular Control of Government.” In Broken Contract: Changing Relationships Between Americans and Their Government, ed. Craig, Stephen C.. Boulder, CO: Westview, Pp. 268–93.Google Scholar
Citrin, Jack, and Green, Donald Philip. 1986. “Presidential Leadership and the Resurgence of Trust in Government.” British Journal of Political Science 16(October):431–53.10.1017/S0007123400004518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Stephen C. 1993. The Malevolent Leaders: Popular Discontent in America. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Craig, Stephen C. 1996. “Change and the American Electorate.” In Broken Contract: Changing Relationships Between Americans and Their Government, ed. Craig, Stephen C.. Boulder, CO: Westview; Pp. 120.Google Scholar
Dionne, E. J. Jr. 1991. Why Americans Hate Politics. New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1965.A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1975. “A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support.” British Journal of Political Science 5(October):435–57.10.1017/S0007123400008309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erber, Ralph, and Lau, Richard R.. 1990. “Political Cynicism Revisited: An Information-Processing Reconciliation of Policy-Based and Incumbency-Based Interpretations of Changes in Trust in Government.” American Journal of Political Science 34(January): 236–53.10.2307/2111517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, Stanley. 1983. “The Measurement and Meaning of Political Trust.” Political Methodology 9(3):341–54.Google Scholar
Gallup, George. 1972. The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1935–1971, Volume 3—1959–1971. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Gallup Organization. 1998. The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1997. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources.Google Scholar
Gamson, William A. 1968. Power and Disconnect. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1992. “Blacks and the United States Supreme Court: Models of Diffuse Support.” Journal of Politics 54(November):1120–45.10.2307/2132111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, Roderick P. 1994. Seducing America: How Television Charms the Modern Voter. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 1996. “The Media's Role in Forming Voters' Retrospective Economic Evaluations in 1992.” American Journal of Political Science 40(May):372–95.10.2307/2111629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Patterson, Samuel C.. 1994. “Public Trust in the New Parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe.” Political Studies 42(December):570–92.10.1111/j.1467-9248.1994.tb00299.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes Toward American Political Institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139174466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1970. Exit, Voice, Loyalty; Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, Beck, Paul Allen, Dalton, Russell, and Levine, Jeffrey. 1995. “Political Environments, Cohesive Social Groups, and the Communication of Public Opinion.” American Journal of Political Science 39(November):1025–54.10.2307/2111668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News that Matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent, and Niemi, Richard G.. 1968. “The Transmission of Political Values from Parent to Child.” American Political Science Review 62(March):169–84.10.1017/S0003055400115709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanter, Donald L., and Mirvis, Philip H.. 1989. The Cynical Americans: Living and Working in an Age of Discontent and Disillusion. San Francisco: Josey-Bass.Google Scholar
Karp, Jeffrey A. 1995. “Explaining Public Support for Legislative Term Limits. Public Opinion Quarterly 59(Fall):373–91.10.1086/269482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerbel, Matthew. 1995. Remote and Controlled. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Fiske, Susan. 1986. “Presidents in the Public Mind.” In Handbook of Political Psychology, ed. Hermann, Margaret G.. San Francisco: Josey-Bass. Pp. 193218.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Mendelberg, Tali. 1995. “Cracks in American Apartheid: The Political Impact of Prejudice among Desegregated Whites.” Journal of Politics 57(May):402–24.10.2307/2960313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, Robert E. 1962. Political Ideolody: Why the American Common Man Believes What He Does. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Linville, Patricia W., Salovey, Peter, and Fischer, Gregory W.. 1986. “Stereotyping and Perceived Distributions of Social Characteristics: An Application to Ingroup-Outgroup Perception.” In Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism, ed. Dovidio, John F. and Gaertner, Samuel L.. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Martin, Lipset Seymour, and Schneider, William. 1983. The Confidence Gap: Business, Labor, and Government in the Public Mind. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Tursky, Bernard. 1979. “Comparisons between Category and Magnitude Scaling of Public Opinion Employing SRC/CPS Items.” American Political Science Review 73(March): 5066.10.2307/1954730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1997. “Social and Cultural Causes of Dissatisfaction with U.S. Government.” In Why People Don't Trust Government, ed. Nye, Joseph S. Jr., Zelikow, Philip, and King, David C.. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Pp. 133–53.Google Scholar
Markus, Gregory B. 1979. “The Political Environment and the Dynamics of Public Attitudes: A Panel Study.” American Journal of Political Science 23(May):338–59.10.2307/2111006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur H. 1974a. “Political Issues and Trust in Government, 1964–70.” American Political Science Review 68(September):951–72.10.2307/1959140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur H. 1974b. “Rejoinder to ‘Comment’ by Jack Citrin: Political Discontent or Ritualism?American Political Science Review 68(September):9891001.10.2307/1959142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur H. 1983. “Is Confidence Rebounding?Public Opinion 6(June–July):1620.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., and Borrelli, Stephen. 1991. “Confidence in Government During the 1980s.” American Politics Quarterly 19(April):147–73.10.1177/1532673X9101900201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., and Listhaug, Ola. 1990. “Political Parties and Confidence in Government: A Comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States.” British Journal of Political Science 20(July): 357–86.10.1017/S0007123400005883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., Goldenberg, Edie, and Erbring, Lutz. 1979. “Type-Set Politics: Impact of Newspapers on Public Confidence.” American Political Science Review 73(March):6784.10.2307/1954731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., and the National Election Studies. 1989. American National Election Study, 1988: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [computer file] (Study #9196). Conducted by University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies, 2d ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
Miller, Warren E., Kinder, Donald R., Rosenstone, Steven J., and the National Election Studies. 1993. American National Election Study, 1992: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [enhanced with 1990 and 1991 data] [computer file] (Study #6067). Conducted by University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies, and Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producers], 1993. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1993.Google Scholar
Neuman, W. Russell, Just, Marion R., and Crigler, Ann N.. 1992. Common Knowledge: News and the Construction of Political Meaning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226161174.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neustadt, Richard E. 1990. Presidential Power. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Patterson, Samuel C., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1990. “Stand Up for Congress: Variations in Public Esteem Since the 1960s.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 15(February):2547.10.2307/440000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, Thomas. 1993. Out of Order. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Pew Foundation. 1998. Deconstructing Distrust: How Americans View Government. Washington: Pew Foundation for the People and the Press.Google Scholar
Ranney, Austin. 1983. Channels of Power: The Impact of Television on American Politics. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Rivers, Douglas, and Rose, Nancy. 1985. “Passing the President's Program.” American Journal of Political Science 29(May):183–96.10.2307/2111162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Michael. 1976. “Public Affairs Television and the Growth of Political Malaise: The Case of ‘The Selling of the Pentagon.’American Political Science Review 70(June):409–32.10.2307/1959647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., Kinder, Donald R., and Miller, Warren E., and the National Elections Studies. 1995. American National Election Study, 1994: Post-Election Survey [enhanced with 1992 and 1993 data] [computer file] (Study #6507). Conducted by University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. 2d ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies/Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producers], 1995. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1995.Google Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., Kinder, Donald R., Miller, Warren E., and the National Election Studies. 1997. American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [computer file] (Study #6896). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer], 1997. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1997.Google Scholar
Stokes, Donald E. 1962. “Popular Evaluations of Government: An Empirical Assessment.” In Ethics and Bigness: Scientific, Academic, Religious, Political, and Military, ed. Cleveland, Harlan and Lasswell, Harold D.. New York: Harper and Brothers. Pp. 6172.Google Scholar
Weatherford, M. Stephen. 1984. “Economic ‘Stagflation’ and Public Support for the Political System.” British Journal of Political Science 14(April):187205.10.1017/S0007123400003525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weatherford, M. Stephen. 1987. “How Does Government Performance Influence Political Support?Political Behavior 9(1):528.10.1007/BF00987276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weatherford, M. Stephen. 1992. “Measuring Political Legitimacy.” American Political Science Review 86(March):149–66.10.2307/1964021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, John T. 1985. “Systemic Influences on Political Trust: The Importance of Perceived Institutional Performance.” Political Methodology 11(1–2):125–42.Google Scholar
668
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Political Relevance of Political Trust
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Political Relevance of Political Trust
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Political Relevance of Political Trust
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *