Conclusions and future research studying trust in

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: anisms, the outcomes construct by 201 feedback mechanisms, and the government’s action construct by 198 feedback mechanisms, dramatically increasing the dynamic complexity captured with the model. Conclusions and Future Research Studying trust in government led us to identify a complex set of interactions linking government action, citizen participation, memory, expectations, outcomes observed, and performance. In the literature, many other factors are identified as being linked to trust development and additional alternative explanations will surely arise. Keele (2005, p. 883), for instance, found evidence that “while government performance is an important predictor of trust, partisans recognize that when their party controls the Congress or the presidency, the government is more trustworthy,” and that “trust is an evaluation of politicians and their management of the economy” (Keele, 2007, p. 251). To further understand the dynamics of trust in government, additional hypotheses should be explored and tested. Examples of hypotheses to be tested include the role of political and public administration factors (Cejudo, 2007; Hetherington, 1998; Keele, 2005, 2007; Langer, 2002; Miller, 1974; Mishler et al., 1997; Ruscio, 1996); use of e-government technology (specifically, the use of government Web portals) to increase trust and confidence in the government (Tolbert et al., 2006); increased citizen participation (King et al., 1998); use of e-government technology to achieve this increase (Holzer, Melitski, Rho, and Schwester, 2004); use of mass media as a vehicle for bringing adequate information cues to the public and making them available and attractive (Simonson, 1999); exploitation of weak ties in knowledge transfer (Levin and Cross, 2004); role of trust in perceived risk and benefits of uncertain events, hazardous situations, and public action (Siegrist and Cvetkovich, 2000; Siegrist, Cvetkovich, and Roth, 2000); and role of risk communication in the development of trust (Earle et al., 1998). It is our belief that although the model presented here is incomplete an...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/05/2010 for the course POL 3232 taught by Professor What during the Spring '10 term at Accreditation Commission for Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online