IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i11p6867-d831291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Does Social Security Fairness Predict Trust in Government? The Serial Mediation Effects of Social Security Satisfaction and Life Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Kuiyun Zhi

    (School of Public Policy and Administration, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Qiurong Tan

    (School of Public Policy and Administration, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Si Chen

    (School of Business Administration, Chongqing Technology and Business University, Chongqing 400067, China)

  • Yongjin Chen

    (School of Public Policy and Administration, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Xiaoqin Wu

    (School of Public Policy and Administration, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Chenkai Xue

    (School of Public Policy and Administration, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Anbang Song

    (School of Public Policy and Administration, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

Abstract

Several studies have found that trust in government is associated with social fairness, citizens’ satisfaction with public service, and life satisfaction. This study aimed to investigate the serial mediation effects of social security satisfaction and life satisfaction on the association between social security fairness and trust in government. We analyzed the data from the Chinese Social Survey in 2019 ( n = 7403) to examine the serial mediation effects. The findings showed that the higher the level of government, the greater the trust it enjoyed from its citizens. The direct prediction of trust by social security fairness was stronger at the county and township levels than at the central government level. Both social security satisfaction and life satisfaction partially mediated the relationship between social security fairness and overall trust in government. Social security fairness indirectly positively predicted trust in local government at the county and township levels through social security satisfaction, life satisfaction, and their serial mediation. While social security fairness could only indirectly predict trust in central government through social security satisfaction, the prediction of trust in central government via life satisfaction (mediator) was not significant. We observed a serial mediation model in which social security fairness positively predicted trust in government directly and indirectly through social security satisfaction and life satisfaction. The finding that social security satisfaction partially mediates the relationship between perceptions of fairness in the social security system and trust in government has implications for improving policies and the functioning of the system at all levels of the government.

Suggested Citation

  • Kuiyun Zhi & Qiurong Tan & Si Chen & Yongjin Chen & Xiaoqin Wu & Chenkai Xue & Anbang Song, 2022. "How Does Social Security Fairness Predict Trust in Government? The Serial Mediation Effects of Social Security Satisfaction and Life Satisfaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6867-:d:831291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6867/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6867/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    2. Nicolas Loewe & Mehdi Bagherzadeh & Luis Araya-Castillo & Claudio Thieme & Joan Batista-Foguet, 2014. "Life Domain Satisfactions as Predictors of Overall Life Satisfaction Among Workers: Evidence from Chile," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 71-86, August.
    3. Bruce Headey & Ruut Veenhoven & Alex Wearing, 1991. "Top-down versus bottom-up theories of subjective well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 81-100, February.
    4. Miller, Arthur H. & Listhaug, Ola, 1990. "Political Parties and Confidence in Government: A Comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 357-386, July.
    5. Qian Liu & Haimin Pan, 2020. "Investigation on Life Satisfaction of Rural-to-Urban Migrant Workers in China: A Moderated Mediation Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-14, April.
    6. Jian Yang & Chaohua Dong & Yongjin Chen, 2021. "Government’s Economic Performance Fosters Trust in Government in China: Assessing the Moderating Effect of Respect for Authority," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 545-558, April.
    7. JaeYoul Shin, 2018. "Relative Deprivation, Satisfying Rationality, and Support for Redistribution," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 35-56, November.
    8. Henry Kaiser, 1974. "An index of factorial simplicity," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 39(1), pages 31-36, March.
    9. Sanjit Kumar Roy & Walfried M. Lassar & Vaibhav Shekhar, 2016. "Convenience and satisfaction: mediation of fairness and quality," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(5-6), pages 239-260, April.
    10. Dong, Keyong & Ye, Xiangfeng, 2003. "Social security system reform in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 417-425.
    11. Xiwen Fu, 2018. "The Contextual Effects of Political Trust on Happiness: Evidence from China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 491-516, September.
    12. Sedef Turper & Kees Aarts, 2017. "Political Trust and Sophistication: Taking Measurement Seriously," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 415-434, January.
    13. Mishra, Sandeep & Carleton, R. Nicholas, 2015. "Subjective relative deprivation is associated with poorer physical and mental health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 144-149.
    14. Zhichao Li & Xihan Tan, 2018. "Revitalization of Trust in Local Government after Wenchuan Earthquake: Constraints and Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    15. Christoph H. Loch & Yaozhong Wu, 2008. "Social Preferences and Supply Chain Performance: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1835-1849, November.
    16. Jingfei Zhang & Zhicheng Zheng & Lijun Zhang & Yaochen Qin & Jieran Duan & Anyi Zhang, 2021. "Influencing Factors of Environmental Risk Perception during the COVID-19 Epidemic in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-21, September.
    17. Van Thanh Vu, 2021. "Public Trust in Government and Compliance with Policy during COVID-19 Pandemic: Empirical Evidence from Vietnam," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 779-796, December.
    18. Feng Sun & Jing Xiao, 2012. "Perceived Social Policy Fairness and Subjective Wellbeing: Evidence from China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 107(1), pages 171-186, May.
    19. Dejun Kong, 2013. "Intercultural Experience as an Impediment of Trust: Examining the Impact of Intercultural Experience and Social Trust Culture on Institutional Trust in Government," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 847-858, September.
    20. Yunsoo Lee, 2021. "Government for Leaving No One Behind: Social Equity in Public Administration and Trust in Government," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fang Dong & Jiyao Yin & Jirubin Xiang & Zhangyu Chang & Tiantian Gu & Feihu Han, 2023. "EWM-FCE-ODM-Based Evaluation of Smart Community Construction: From the Perspective of Residents’ Sense of Gain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gabriele Camera & Cary Deck & David Porter, 2020. "Do economic inequalities affect long-run cooperation and prosperity?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 53-83, March.
    2. Ni Du & Qinglan Han, 2018. "Pricing and Service Quality Guarantee Decisions in Logistics Service Supply Chain with Fairness Concern," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 35(05), pages 1-41, October.
    3. Sezer Ülkü & Chris Hydock & Shiliang Cui, 2022. "Social Queues (Cues): Impact of Others’ Waiting in Line on One’s Service Time," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 7958-7976, November.
    4. Ernan Haruvy & Elena Katok & Zhongwen Ma & Suresh Sethi, 2019. "Relationship-specific investment and hold-up problems in supply chains: theory and experiments," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 45-74, April.
    5. Xu, Hao & Chen, Liuxin & Ma, Lijun, 2024. "Supply chain product innovation and marketing strategies under different fairness concerns," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    6. Meral Ugur-Cinar & Kursat Cinar & Tekin Kose, 2020. "How Does Education Affect Political Trust?: An Analysis of Moderating Factors," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 779-808, November.
    7. Clara Viñas-Bardolet & Monica Guillen-Royo & Joan Torrent-Sellens, 2020. "Job Characteristics and Life Satisfaction in the EU: a Domains-of-Life Approach," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(4), pages 1069-1098, September.
    8. Caliskan-Demirag, Ozgun & Chen, Youhua (Frank) & Li, Jianbin, 2010. "Channel coordination under fairness concerns and nonlinear demand," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1321-1326, December.
    9. Zongsheng Huang, 2020. "Stochastic Differential Game in the Closed-Loop Supply Chain with Fairness Concern Retailer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, April.
    10. Gabriele Camera & Cary Deck & David Porter, 2019. "Do Economic Inequalities Affect Long-Run Cooperation & Prosperity?," Working Papers 19-09, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    11. Messinger, Paul R., 2016. "The role of fairness in competitive supply chain relationships: An experimental studyAuthor-Name: Choi, Sungchul," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 798-813.
    12. Xiao Zhou & Xiancong Wu, 2023. "Decisions for a Retailer-Led Low-Carbon Supply Chain Considering Altruistic Preference under Carbon Quota Policy," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, February.
    13. Mariano Rojas & Karen Watkins-Fassler & Lázaro Rodríguez-Ariza, 2022. "The Life Satisfaction of Owner-Manager Entrepreneurs When the Business of Business is not only Business," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 2251-2275, August.
    14. Xiaoting Zheng & Jiayue Chen & Yipeng Li, 2021. "The association between charitable giving and happiness: Evidence from the Chinese General Social Survey," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(6), pages 2103-2138, December.
    15. Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Ilkka Leppänen, 2017. "Cheap talk and cooperation in Stackelberg games," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(2), pages 261-285, June.
    16. Qingfeng Meng & Zhen Li & Jianguo Du & Huimin Liu & Xiang Ding, 2019. "Negotiation for Time Optimization in Construction Projects with Competitive and Social Welfare Preferences," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-13, January.
    17. Chai Caichun & Zhu Hailong & Feng Zhangwei, 2018. "Evolutionary Stable Strategies for Supply Chains: Selfishness, Fairness, and Altruism," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 6(6), pages 532-551, December.
    18. Li, Qingying, 2018. "The optimal multi-period modular design with fairness concerns," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 233-249.
    19. Wentao Yi & Chunqiao Tan, 2019. "Bertrand Game with Nash Bargaining Fairness Concern," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-22, August.
    20. Wu, Diana Yan, 2013. "The impact of repeated interactions on supply chain contracts: A laboratory study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 3-15.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6867-:d:831291. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.