Interpersonal Trust and the Magnitude of Protest

Abstract

The authors demonstrate that interpersonal trust is an important factor in motivating protest participation and raising the intensity of protest. They suggest that high levels of trust make individuals likely to anticipate low expected costs of participation while leading to optimistic estimates of the potential benefits of protest. Using 1990 World Values Survey data for 33 countries, a series of multinomial logistic regressions confirms that interpersonal trust plays an important role in determining both militant and nonmilitant forms of protest. These findings hold at the individual level in both free and nonfree societies. The authors also find some evidence that the same relationships hold at the national level. In addition, trust and postmaterialist values are shown to have complementary roles in fostering protest, whereas education is largely insignificant. Interpersonal trust, therefore, serves as both a personal and a social capital resource that fosters collective action in the form of protest.

When trust matters—a multilevel analysis of the effect of generalized trust on political participation in 25 European democracies

“…Nevertheless, the empirical results are somewhat ambivalent. Most studies find a positive relationship between generalized trust and political participation (Benson & Rochon, 2004;Fennema & Tillie, 2001;Kaase, 1999;Norris, 2002;Putnam, 1993Putnam, , 2000, but others find the connection to be either weak, non-existent or even negative at both the individual and the aggregate level (Bäck, 2011;Muhlberger, 2003;Pattie, Sayd, & Whiteley, 2003;Rothstein, 2003;Uslaner & Brown, 2005).…”

“…Scholars have considered a high degree of generalized trust to be a central component of a vibrant democratic society where citizens are active in political processes (Almond & Verba, 1963). A number of empirical studies have examined the link between generalized trust and political behaviour (Benson & Rochon, 2004;Kaase, 1999;Putnam, 2000;Uslaner & Brown, 2005), but the evidence is far from conclusive and most studies find only a weak or even non-significant relationship both at the individual (Bäck, 2011;Rothstein, 2003) and at the aggregated level (Uslaner & Brown, 2005).…”

“…Effective social and political organizations, in turn, help create effective and legitimate government, which helps create the social conditions for a strong civil society. Thus, it makes sense to study the effects of aggregate levels of trust on how trust at the individual-level influences different forms of participation (see also Benson & Rochon, 2004;Newton, 2006;Putnam, 2000;Uslaner, 1999;Uslaner & Brown, 2005). According to Putnam, Pharr, and Dalton (2000, p. 26), social capital has widespread societal consequences and the effects can therefore not be reduced to the individual level.…”

Trust and Tolerance across the Middle East and North Africa: A Comparative Perspective on the Impact of the Arab Uprisings

“…Interpersonal or social trust, on the other hand, refers to the belief that other people are generally willing to behave in ways that are not detrimental to others, thus measuring the way people "evaluate the trustworthiness of the world they live in" (Benson & Rochon, 2004;Newton, 2001, p. 203).…”

Mobilisation and protest: environmental justice in Durban, South Africa

“…Citizens without political freedoms can engage in political protest (as during Apartheid in South Africa). In such countries, interpersonal trust may be an important pathway for information exchange and a catalyst for collective action (Benson and Rochon 2004).…”