Abstract
Abstract
This chapter builds on the dynamic analysis of the previous chapter by exploring in more detail the types of appraisal that shape citizens’ trust at particular points in time. The analysis highlights the range of considerations involved in trust judgements, covering what politicians do, their concern with citizens’ interests, and their integrity. Trust is shown to be a complex judgement, not reducible to any particular criteria or consideration. The chapter also explores important specificities in the factors associated with trust, notably whether these are consistent or variant between different individuals, between different institutions, and at different points in time. The evidence suggests that while trust represents a generalized judgement, it is often applied in specific ways.
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Reference567 articles.
1. Aarts, Kees, Carolien van Ham, and Jacques Thomassen (2017) ‘Modernization, Globalization and Satisfaction with Democracy’, in Carolien van Ham et al., eds, Myth and Reality of the Legitimacy Crisis: Explaining Trends and Cross-National Differences in Established Democracies, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 37–58.
2. The Divided Electorate: Media Use and Political Involvement;Journal of Politics,2003
3. Aarts, Kees, Audun Fladmoe, and Jesper Strömbäck (2012) ‘Media, Political Trust, and Political Knowledge: A Comparative Perspective’, in Toril Aalberg and James Curran, eds, How Media Inform Democracy: A Comparative Approach, London: Routledge, pp. 98–118.
4. Aarts, Kees, Jacques Thomassen, and Carolien van Ham (2014) ‘Globalization, Representation and Attitudes towards Democracy’, in Jacques Thomassen, ed, Elections and Democracy: Representation and Accountability, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 201–231.
5. Substance Matters: How News Content Can Reduce Political Cynicism;International Journal of Public Opinion Research,2012