2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2021.101693
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Civic honesty and cultures of trust

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For Asian families, these motives may have been underrepresented in the Prosocialness Scale for Adults. On the other hand, lower levels of prosocial behavior in Eastern Europe compared to the overall sample might be explained by lower of social trust that has previously been observed in post-communist countries (e.g., Bjørnskov, 2007Bjørnskov, , 2021. If a society is characterized by doubts that most other people are behaving according to social norms, this might reduce the demonstration of prosocial behaviors.…”
Section: Prosocial Behavior During the Pandemicmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…For Asian families, these motives may have been underrepresented in the Prosocialness Scale for Adults. On the other hand, lower levels of prosocial behavior in Eastern Europe compared to the overall sample might be explained by lower of social trust that has previously been observed in post-communist countries (e.g., Bjørnskov, 2007Bjørnskov, , 2021. If a society is characterized by doubts that most other people are behaving according to social norms, this might reduce the demonstration of prosocial behaviors.…”
Section: Prosocial Behavior During the Pandemicmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…The correlation between the sampling rate and the reporting rate is observed to see if the AUC of the sampling rate and the reporting rate is > 0.8 (30,31,32). If an AUC > 0.8 is observed for the sampling rate and the reporting rate, then the sampling rate is a good predictor of the reporting rate, and since the reporting rate is assumed to be the golden standard of "civic honesty", that is, the sampling rate is a good predictor of "civic honesty", which is therefore, it can be proved that hypothesis A is not valid, that is the reporting rate is not the golden standard of "civic honesty", and there is an obvious design flaw in using reporting rate as a single indicator for evaluating "civic honesty" (33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43), which makes the findings in the literatur (5,6) 2, and ROC curves were plotted. The ROC curves were obtained by excluding the data with zero number of categories (e.g., if the Dj was 10% and the number of categories 1 or 2 was 0, then that the data with 10% of categories and the data with AUC confidence interval including 1 (44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52) were excluded.…”
Section: Roc Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although early studies questioned the survey approach to measuring social trust, and specifically which type of trust it effectively measures, more recent studies have supported it. Social trust as measured in surveys for example correlates with individual behavior in anonymized laboratory experiments (Cox et al, 2009;Sapienza et al, 2013) and real-life wallet-drop experiments (Bjørnskov, 2021;Knack & Keefer, 1997). Trust also persists over time, and potentially across several generations, as it appears to be transmitted stably from parents to children (Katz & Rotter, 1969;Uslaner, 2008), and is shaped by deep historical differences (Nunn & Wantchekon, 2011).…”
Section: Data and Estimation Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%