IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i15p6512-d1209439.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptive Coping Strategies at the Time of COVID-19: The Role of Social and General Trust

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Rita Graziani

    (Department of Communication and Economics, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Viale Allegri 9, 42121 Reggio Emilia, Italy)

  • Lucia Botindari

    (SAIS Europe, Johns Hopkins University, Via Andreatta 3, 40126 Bologna, Italy)

  • Michela Menegatti

    (Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 5, 40126 Bologna, Italy)

  • Silvia Moscatelli

    (Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 5, 40126 Bologna, Italy)

Abstract

Research in the field shows the crucial role of trust in the functioning of many aspects of social life, especially when dealing with emergencies. We report the results of a study ( N = 883) carried out in Italy during the first phase of the COVID-19 crisis to assess whether and how social trust (i.e., trust in those who have the authority and responsibility for making decisions, such as the Italian government, the regional government, the Civil Protection, the European Union, the Catholic Church, and the scientific community) and general trust (i.e., trust in the trustworthiness of other individuals, such as Italians and humankind) are associated with the employment of coping strategies in dealing with the challenges of the pandemic. Overall, the results highlight that trust in different authorities and institutions and trust in other human beings are positively associated with the adoption of adaptive coping strategies such as seeking social support, positive reinterpretation and growth, problem-solving orientation, and transcendent orientation. In contrast, they are negatively related to the adoption of maladaptive coping strategies such as avoidance. These findings point out the benefits of various types of trust in helping individuals deal with crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Rita Graziani & Lucia Botindari & Michela Menegatti & Silvia Moscatelli, 2023. "Adaptive Coping Strategies at the Time of COVID-19: The Role of Social and General Trust," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(15), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:15:p:6512-:d:1209439
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/15/6512/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/15/6512/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mueller, John E., 1970. "Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson1," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(1), pages 18-34, March.
    2. Michele Roccato & Pasquale Colloca & Nicoletta Cavazza & Silvia Russo, 2021. "Coping with the COVID‐19 pandemic through institutional trust: Rally effects, compensatory control, and emotions," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2360-2367, September.
    3. Michael Siegrist, 2021. "Trust and Risk Perception: A Critical Review of the Literature," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 480-490, March.
    4. Michael Siegrist & George Cvetkovich & Claudia Roth, 2000. "Salient Value Similarity, Social Trust, and Risk/Benefit Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3), pages 353-362, June.
    5. Diego Gambetta & Davide Morisi, 2022. "COVID-19 infection induces higher trust in strangers," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 119(32), pages 2116818119-, August.
    6. Richard J. Bord & Robert E. O'Connor, 1990. "Risk Communication, Knowledge, and Attitudes: Explaining Reactions to a Technology Perceived as Risky," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 499-506, December.
    7. Oude Groeniger, Joost & Noordzij, Kjell & van der Waal, Jeroen & de Koster, Willem, 2021. "Dutch COVID-19 lockdown measures increased trust in government and trust in science: A difference-in-differences analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    8. Diego Gambetta & Davide Morisi, 2022. "COVID-19 infection induces higher trust in strangers," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 119(32), pages 2116818119-, August.
    9. Groothuis, Peter A & Miller, Gail, 1997. "The Role of Social Distrust in Risk-Benefit Analysis: A Study of the Siting of a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 241-257, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michael Siegrist & Timothy C. Earle & Heinz Gutscher, 2003. "Test of a Trust and Confidence Model in the Applied Context of Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 705-716, August.
    2. Angela Bearth & Gulbanu Kaptan & Sabrina Heike Kessler, 2022. "Genome-edited versus genetically-modified tomatoes: an experiment on people’s perceptions and acceptance of food biotechnology in the UK and Switzerland," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 1117-1131, September.
    3. Chunli Wei & Qingqing Li & Ziyi Lian & Yijun Luo & Shiqing Song & Hong Chen, 2022. "Variation in Public Trust, Perceived Societal Fairness, and Well-Being before and after COVID-19 Onset—Evidence from the China Family Panel Studies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Hamza Umer & Yanjun Li, 2024. "Positive and negative health events and trust," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 459-479, May.
    5. Miguel Ángel López-Navarro & Jaume Llorens-Monzonís & Vicente Tortosa-Edo, 2013. "The Effect of Social Trust on Citizens’ Health Risk Perception in the Context of a Petrochemical Industrial Complex," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    6. Liu, Ning & Bao, Guoxian & Wu, Shaolong, 2023. "Social implications of Covid-19: Its impact on general trust, political trust, and trust in physicians in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 317(C).
    7. Hamza Umer, 2023. "A selected literature review of the effect of Covid-19 on preferences," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(1), pages 147-156, June.
    8. E. Van Kleef & J. R. Houghton & A. Krystallis & U. Pfenning & G. Rowe & H. Van Dijk & I. A. Van der Lans & L. J. Frewer, 2007. "Consumer Evaluations of Food Risk Management Quality in Europe," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 1565-1580, December.
    9. Ben Davies & Fanny Lalot & Linus Peitz & Maria S. Heering & Hilal Ozkececi & Jacinta Babaian & Kaya Davies Hayon & Jo Broadwood & Dominic Abrams, 2021. "Changes in political trust in Britain during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: integrated public opinion evidence and implications," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, December.
    10. T. Clifton Morgan & Sally Howard Campbell, 1991. "Domestic Structure, Decisional Constraints, and War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(2), pages 187-211, June.
    11. repec:zbw:bofitp:2022_009 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Rodrigo Martins & Francisco Veiga, 2013. "Economic voting in Portuguese municipal elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 317-334, June.
    13. Angela Bearth & Marie‐Eve Cousin & Michael Siegrist, 2016. "“The Dose Makes the Poison”: Informing Consumers About the Scientific Risk Assessment of Food Additives," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 130-144, January.
    14. Martin Gassebner & Richard Jong‐A‐Pin & Jochen O. Mierau, 2011. "Terrorism And Cabinet Duration," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(4), pages 1253-1270, November.
    15. Sangsomboon Ploywarin & Yan Song & Dian Sun, 2018. "Research on Factors Affecting Public Risk Perception of Thai High-Speed Railway Projects Based on “Belt and Road Initiative”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    16. Nils D. Steiner & Ruxanda Berlinschi & Etienne Farvaque & Jan Fidrmuc & Philipp Harms & Alexander Mihailov & Michael Neugart & Piotr Stanek, 2023. "Rallying around the EU flag: Russia's invasion of Ukraine and attitudes toward European integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 283-301, March.
    17. Francisco Jose Veiga & Linda Goncalves Veiga, 2010. "The impact of local and national economic conditions on legislative election results," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(13), pages 1727-1734.
    18. Sinha, Pankaj & Verma, Aniket & Shah, Purav & Singh, Jahnavi & Panwar, Utkarsh, 2020. "Prediction for the 2020 United States Presidential Election using Machine Learning Algorithm: Lasso Regression," MPRA Paper 103889, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 Oct 2020.
    19. Geoffrey M. Ducanes & Steven Rood & Jorge Tigno, 2023. "Identity, Policy Satisfaction, Perceived Character: What factors explain President Duterte's popularity?," Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University, Working Paper Series 202305, Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University.
    20. Timothy C. Earle, 2004. "Thinking Aloud about Trust: A Protocol Analysis of Trust in Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 169-183, February.
    21. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.

    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:20:y:2023:i:15:p:6512-:d:1209439. 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.