IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jtrust/v9y2019i2p136-163.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Qualitative meta-analysis of propensity to trust measurement

Author

Listed:
  • Volker Patent
  • Rosalind H. Searle

Abstract

In a rapidly changing and dynamic world, individuals’ propensity to trust is likely to become an increasingly important facet for understanding human behaviour, yet its measurement has mostly been unexplored. We undertake the first systematic qualitative survey of propensity to trust scales using qualitative meta-analysis methodology to review the literature (1966–2018) and identify 26 measures and their applications in 179 studies. Using content analysis, we thematically organise these scales into six thematic areas and discuss the emerging implications. We find that while most of these scales reflect propensity to trust in terms of a positive belief in human nature, other themes include general trust, role expectations, institutional trust, cautiousness and other personality attributes. We reveal significant methodological concerns regarding several scales and argue for more considered selection of scales for use in research. We examine the case for multidimensionality in measures of propensity to trust used within organisational research. Rather than treating a lack of generalisability of findings in existing organisational studies as purely a problem of measurement design, we instead outline an agenda for further conceptual and empirical study.

Suggested Citation

  • Volker Patent & Rosalind H. Searle, 2019. "Qualitative meta-analysis of propensity to trust measurement," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 136-163, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jtrust:v:9:y:2019:i:2:p:136-163
    DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2019.1675074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21515581.2019.1675074
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21515581.2019.1675074?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jtrust:v:9:y:2019:i:2:p:136-163. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJTR20 .

    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.