Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite recent attention to trust, comparatively little is known about distrust as distinct from trust. In this paper, we drew on case study data of a reorganized court of law, where intergroup distrust had grown between judges and administrators, to develop a dynamic theory of distrust. We used insights from the literatures on distrust, conflict escalation, and professional–organization relations to guide the analysis of our case data. Our research is consistent with insights on distrust previously postulated, but we were able to extend and make more precise the perceptions and behaviors that make up the elements of the self-amplifying cycle of distrust development, how these elements are related, and the mechanisms of amplification that drive the cycle. To help guide and focus future research, we modeled the process by which distrust emerges and develops, and we drew inferences on how it can be repaired.

Increasing political distrust has become a commonplace observational remark across many established democracies, and it is often used to explain current political phenomena. In contrast to most scholarship that focuses solely on the concept of trust and leaves distrust untheorized, this article makes a contribution by analysing political distrust. It argues that citizen distrust of government and political institutions poses a threat for democratic politics and clarifies the relationship between the distrust observed in established democracies and classical ‘liberal distrust’, which is considered beneficial for democracy. Further, it addresses the relationship between trust and distrust, identifying a series of functional asymmetries between the two concepts, with important implications for theoretical and empirical work in political science. The article suggests that a conceptualization of political distrust based on evaluations of incompetence, unethical conduct and incongruent interests can provide a fruitful ground for future research that aims to understand the causes, consequences, and potential remedies for political distrust.

Context Although health care-related distrust may contribute to racial disparities in health and health care in the US, current evidence about racial differences in distrust is often conflicting, largely limited to measures of physician trust, and rarely linked to multidimensional trust or distrust. Objective To test the hypothesis that racial differences in health care system distrust are more closely linked to values distrust than to competence distrust. Design Cross-sectional telephone survey. Participants Two hundred fifty-five individuals (144 black, 92 white) who had been treated in primary care practices or the emergency department of a large, urban Mid-Atlantic health system. Primary measures Race, scores on the overall health care system distrust scale and on the 2 distrust subscales, values distrust and competence distrust. Results In univariate analysis, overall health care system distrust scores were slightly higher among blacks than whites (25.8 vs 24.1, p  = .05); however, this difference was driven by racial differences in values distrust scores (15.4 vs 13.8, p  = .003) rather than in competence distrust scores (10.4 vs 10.3, p  = .85). After adjustment for socioeconomic status, health/psychological status, and health care access, individuals in the top quartile of values distrust were significantly more likely to be black (odds ratio = 2.60, 95% confidence interval = 1.03–6.58), but there was no significant association between race and competence distrust. Conclusions Racial differences in health care system distrust are complex with far greater differences seen in the domain of values distrust than in competence distrust. This framework may be useful for explaining the mixed results of studies of race and health care-related distrust to date, for the design of future studies exploring the causes of racial disparities in health and health care, and for the development and testing of novel strategies for reducing these disparities.

Recent philosophical work on trust has emphasised its importance to both epistemology and ethics, asking whether reasons to trust someone must be based on reasons to think her trustworthy. Hawley adopts two common assumptions. First, trust is primarily a three-place relation, involving two people and a task: you may trust me to look after your children, to keep a secret, or to tell the truth (Holton 1994, Jones 1996, Hardin 2002, Hieronymi 2008). We do sometimes speak of simply trusting someone, and Hawley will discuss this generalised trust in section 7.2. Second, trust involves expectations about both competence and willingness: when you trust me to look after your children, you take it that I am capable of childcare, and that I will exercise that capability as required.

This research aims to analyse the indirect effect of pluralistic attitudes and political distrust on the relationship between relative deprivation and populist attitudes. We conducted a survey on a sample of 3,800 adults from Chile, Colombia, and Peru and performed a mediation analysis using structural equation modelling. The findings showed that political distrust and pluralism have positive and statistically significant indirect effects on the relation between relative deprivation and populist attitudes in these three countries. These findings suggest that perceptions of inequality may contribute to increased political distrust and be associated with pluralistic demands to listen to those perceived as marginalised from power, which ultimately predicts populist attitudes. The study posits that this is a model that may explain the inclusive populism that is often prevalent in Latin American countries.

Ibis study adds to the growing research exploring the consequences of knowledge hiding in organizations. Drawing from the social exchange theory and the norm of reciprocity, this paper examines the direct and indirect—via distrust in supervisor—relationships between supervisor knowledge hiding (SKH) and supervisee organizational citizenship behavior directed at the supervisor (OCB-S) in the context of the Middle East. Using a supervisor-supervisee dyadic design, two-source data were obtained from 317 employees (local and foreign) of 41 Saudi firms. The findings suggest that supervisees' distrust in their supervisors mediates the significant and negative relationship between SKH and supervisees' OCB-S. Furthermore, the significant and positive relationship between SKH and distrust in supervisor is more pronounced for foreign workers than for local workers. This study provides empirical support and a better understanding of the existence and consequences of SKH for local and foreign workers and also discusses the theoretical and practical implications of the findings.

Purpose Knowledge is considered as a strategic asset for the organizations, especially for knowledge-intensive firms. Research and development (R&D) is a significant unit in organizations, as it is devoted to knowledge creation and transfer. The success of any R&D project in an organization depends on its innovative value and the transfer of knowledge to the employees. This study aims to focus on factors triggering knowledge-hiding behavior among R&D employees, thus disrupting the knowledge creation in the organization. Design/methodology/approach The grounded theory approach has been used to analyze qualitative data collected from 19 in-depth interviews of R&D professionals (middle and junior level) working in Indian pharmaceutical firms. Findings The study identified factors that triggered knowledge-hiding behavior among employees. These factors include distrust, competitive work environment, perceived career insecurity, lack of recognition, lack of reciprocation and lack of confidence in own knowledge. In addition, four hiding strategies used by employees to hide their knowledge from their fellow members were explored and identified: playing innocent, being misleader/evasive hiding, rationalized hiding and counter-questioning. Research limitations/implications Besides improving the understanding of knowledge-hiding behavior, particularly in the Indian context, this study has implications for both managerial practices and organizational policies. Originality/value This paper highlights the factors influencing knowledge-hiding behavior among R&D employees. Knowledge-hiding construct has not been adequately studied; however, it prevails in the organization and has potential to influence various individual- and organizational-level outcomes. In addition, ways of hiding knowledge used by employees were identified and new forms of strategies named “counter-questioning” were found.

Despite the efforts to enhance knowledge transfer in organizations, success has been elusive. It is becoming clear that in many instances employees are unwilling to share their knowledge even when organizational practices are designed to facilitate transfer. Consequently, this paper develops and investigates a novel construct, knowledge hiding. We establish that knowledge hiding exists, we distinguish knowledge hiding from related concepts (knowledge hoarding and knowledge sharing), and we develop a multidimensional measure of this construct. We also identify several predictors of knowledge hiding in organizations. The results of three studies, using different methods, suggest that knowledge hiding is comprised of three related factors: evasive hiding, rationalized hiding, and playing dumb. Each of these hiding behaviors is predicted by distrust, yet each also has a different set of interpersonal and organizational predictors. We draw implications for future research on knowledge management.

PurposeThis article aims to explore the factors influencing patients' distrust toward doctors in online health community.Design/methodology/approachThis study leveraged the distrust construct model and socio-technical systems theory to establish a research model. The authors used the survey method to validate the research model by developing and distributing questionnaires to online health community users. 518 valid responses were collected.FindingsThe data analysis results showed that patients' distrusting beliefs were significantly related to their distrust toward doctors in online health communities. Meanwhile, social factors included perceived egoism and lack of expertise; whereas technical factors included no structural assurance, and lack of third-party recognition.Originality/valueThis study not only provides a solid and comprehensive theoretical understanding of patient distrust toward doctors in online health communities but also could serve as the basis to relieve the distrust between patients and doctors in online health communities, or even in the offline environment.

This study explores the mediating role of health literacy on the association between health care system distrust and vaccine hesitancy. An online survey including Personal Information Form, Health Care System Distrust Scale, Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, and Health Literacy Scale were applied to 620 participants. The degree of applying mask-wearing, hygiene rule and physical distance, and the level of COVID-19 vaccine literacy were modeled with hierarchical multiple regression analysis to have a deeper analysis of participants’ actions towards COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. It was found that health care system distrust and health literacy were the most important variables that had an impact on vaccine hesitancy. Based on the mediation analysis, the total effect of health care system distrust on vaccine hesitancy was statistically significant. Participants who held a low level of health literacy and a high perception of the health care system distrust experienced more vaccine hesitancy. The findings suggested the health literacy mediated the relationship between health care system distrust and vaccine hesitancy. Health authorities need to consider the dynamic and complex factors around the health care system distrust and health literacy to reduce vaccine hesitancy during COVID-19.