Trust In Federal Government Research Articles

Variable trust in public health messaging during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Southeast Alaska

Public health messaging in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic has been variable in effectiveness. Different levels of governmental institutions have different goals and methods; it is unclear how messaging from these disparate levels is received, trusted, and implemented. We investigate the degrees of trust of Alaska Native and non-Alaska Native people in Southeast Alaska for the U.S. federal, Alaska state, and local Southeast Alaskan governments to parse how Southeast Alaskans feel about relative preparation, actions, and public health messaging. We use data collected in two waves of a regional survey: the first in April-June 2020, and the second in November 2020-February 2021. Results indicate that trust in the federal government was significantly lower than in the Alaska state government for each time period, and trust in both federal and state government significantly decreased between the two periods. Trust in the local governments of Southeast Alaska were significantly higher than both state and federal levels, and increased between the two survey waves, albeit insignificantly. We discuss potential drivers of these observations and outline how this can be leveraged for more comprehensive research into how relatively small communities with a large Native presence perceive public health messaging from different sources.

In Whom Do We Trust? A Multifoci Person-Centered Perspective on Institutional Trust during COVID-19.

Institutional trust plays a crucial role when a nation is facing mega crises (e.g., the COVID-19 pandemic) and has implications for employee work experiences and well-being. To date, researchers largely consider how institutional trust or trust in government may predict variables of interest in isolation. However, this variable-centered perspective ignores the possibility that there are subpopulations of employees who may differ in their trust in different institutions (i.e., the state government, the federal government). To address this, we examined institutional trust with two foci (i.e., trust in state government and trust in federal government) from a person-centered perspective. Using latent profile analysis and data from 492 U.S.-based employees, we identified five trust profiles: high trustors, federal trustors, state trustors, the ambivalent, and distrusters, and found that these profiles differentially predicted attitudes towards and behavioral compliance with CDC recommended COVID-19 prevention practices, job insecurity, affective commitment, helping behavior, and psychological well-being.

First‐Hand Experience and Second‐Hand Information: Changing Trust across Three Levels of Government

AbstractLittle is known about how different sources of information drive citizen trust in government. To address that gap this article compares disaster evacuees to observers, noting how trust differs as attention to media coverage increases. First‐hand experience supplies information to update trust through biological and personal processes and performance assessments, while secondary sources provide information about other people's experiences, filtered through lenses that take an active role in crafting information. These two types of information have varying effects depending on the level of government being trusted. Using surveys administered a year after Hurricane Katrina, I find that Katrina evacuees have the highest trust in federal government, until they start paying attention to media coverage, and that attention to coverage has the most dramatic effect on these evacuees compared to all other groups. I also find that increasing attention to second‐hand information corresponds with higher trust in local officials, and that this effect decreases as the level of government increases. It appears media coverage creates a comparison in the mind of hurricane evacuees, causing them to update their performance assessments based on comparing their own experience to that which they observe, thereby updating their political trust.

Demographic indicators of trust in federal, state and local government: implications for Australian health policy makers

To provide baseline findings regarding Australians' trust in federal, state and local government. A computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) survey was administrated during October to December 2009 to a random sample (n=1109) across Australia (response rate 41.2%). Binary logistic regression analyses were carried out by means of SPSS. Age, household size, household income, IRSD and ARIA were found to be significant indicators for trust in federal, state and local government. Trust in state government is lower for older respondents and respondents living in inner and outer regional areas. Trust in local council is lower in respondents living in inner regional areas, respondents living in disadvantaged areas, and respondents in the income bracket of $60001 to $100000. Trust in federal government is lower for older respondents and respondents living in disadvantaged areas. Of note is diminished trust in government among older, regional and lower income ($30001-$60000) respondents. Trust in all levels of government was found to be the lowest in population groups that are identified by empirical research and media to have the poorest access to government services. As a consequence, improved access to services for these populations may increase trust in health policy. Increased trust in health governance may in turn, ensure effective dissemination and implementation of health policies and that existing inequities are not perpetuated through distrust of health information and policy initiatives.

Race, Trust in Government, and Self-Employment

This paper examines the effects of trust in government on the self-employment decision. For black Americans the decision to be self-employed, and the associated returns are likely to be particularly sensitive to trust in the federal government, as the history and political economy of race in the United States required federal government to introduce laws, legislation and institutions to alter the future behavior of whites in their market interactions with blacks. Utilizing General Social Survey Data, I find that among the self-employed, race—being black—is a negative determinant of various measures of trust and confidence in federal government. Parameter estimates from a Bivariate Probit estimator of the likelihood of black self-employment and income reveal that both increase with respect to several measures of trust and confidence in the federal government. The results suggest that as the relative growth and performance of black self-employment is trust and confidence sensitive, the underrepresentation of black-owned firms can possibly be explained by the relatively low trust and confidence in the federal government among black Americans.