ArticleSocial indicators research2025
Socialized to (Dis)trust? A Panel Study into the Origins of Dispositional Institutional Trust.
Article in Social indicators research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A longstanding argument in the field of institutional trust reads that trust is the outcome of a process of socialization. This approach suggests that institutional trust may be understood as a set disposition that is shaped during one's impressionable years (i.e., adolescence and pre-adulthood) and no longer systematically updated during an iterative process afterwards. Consequently, this disposition forms a baseline around which trust judgments tend to vary. Yet, this process of socialization to (dis)trust has not been studied directly. To fill this gap, this paper tests two rivalling models derived from cultural sociology. The active updating model implies that attitude baselines continue to be updated durably throughout a lifetime, whereas the settled dispositions model suggests that these attitudes remain relatively stable over a lifetime: longitudinal variation can be understood as random noise to the model. To test these models, this paper employs two panel data sets in the Netherlands (2018-2022) that measure trust in politics and other institutions annually: the LISS panel (covering the adult population) and the Dutch Adolescent Panel on Democratic Values (covering students in secondary education from age 12). We find evidence supporting the impressionable years hypothesis: while political trust is still subject to repeated updating among adolescents, it has settled into a disposition among adults. As such, our study highlights the relevance of socialization processes for the formation of institutional trust (during adolescence), as well as the relevance of a dispositional root of public attitudes (during adulthood). These findings have important implications for our understanding of both the determinants and consequences of institutional trust.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.