Do untrustworthy faces facilitate the recognition of antonyms? A critical analysis of thinking the opposite under distrust

Distrust should automatically activate a "thinking the opposite". Thus, according to Schul, Mayo and Burnstein (2004), subjects detect antonyms of adjectives faster when confronted with untrustworthy rather than trustworthy faces. We conducted four experiments within their paradigm to test whether the response latency of detecting antonyms remains stable. We introduced the following changes: the paradigm was applied with and without an induction phase, faces were culturally adapted, the stimuli were presented according more to priming rules, and the canonicity of antonyms was controlled. Results show that the response latency of detecting antonyms is difficult to predict. Even if faces are culturally adapted and priming rules are applied more strictly, response latency depends on whether the induction phase is applied and on the canonicity of antonyms rather than on the trustworthiness of faces. In general, this paradigm seems not to be appropriate to test thinking the opposite under distrust.

Analytical thinking under distrust - better not to know that one distrusts

It is widely known that people utter an untruth from time to time. Our ability to detect and recognize deception and lies and, in the next step, to respond appropriately is not very far-reaching. We were interested in finding out if distrust triggers non-routine, analytical thought processes and therefore improves the detection of lies without dismissing the truth. We conducted two experiments to investigate the influence of an unconscious form of distrust on our thought processes. In the first experiment, participants had to determine whether a report is truthful or false. The aim of this second experiment was to investigate if this enhanced ability to detect a falsified report correctly is based on analytical thinking taking place. To examine our assumptions, we applied the paradigm of belief bias. The results of the second experiments strongly point out the fact that an unconscious form of distrust triggers and fosters analytical thinking.

Direct democracy and political trust: Enhancing trust, initiating distrust–or both?

This study investigates the relationship between direct democracy and political trust. We suggest a solution to the controversy in research centering on positive versus negative effects of direct democracy by analytically differentiating between the availability of direct democratic rights and the actual use of those rights. Theoretically, greater availability of direct democratic rights may enhance political trust by increasing citizens’ perception that political authorities can be controlled as well as by incentivizing political authorities to act trustworthily. In contrast, the actual use of the corresponding direct democratic instruments may initiate distrust as it signals to citizens that political authorities do not act in the public’s interest. We test both hypotheses for the very first time with sub-national data of Switzerland. The empirical results seem to support our theoretical arguments.

Dealing with bad guys: actor- and process-level determinants of the “devil shift” in policy making

Policy actors tend to misinterpret and distrust opponents in policy processes. This phenomenon, known as the “devil shift”, consists of the following two dimensions: actors perceive opponents as more powerful and as more evil than they really are. Analysing nine policy processes in Switzerland, this article highlights the drivers of the devil shift at two levels. On the actor level, interest groups, political parties and powerful actors suffer more from the devil shift than state actors and powerless actors. On the process level, the devil shift is stronger in policy processes dealing with socio-economic issues as compared with other issues. Finally, and in line with previous studies, there is less empirical evidence of the power dimension of the devil shift phenomenon than of its evilness dimension.

Effectiveness of Justice-Based Measures in Managing Trust and Privacy Concerns on Social Networking Sites: Intercultural Perspective

The unprecedented success of social networking sites (SNSs) has been recently overshadowed by concerns about privacy risks. As SNS users grow weary of privacy breaches and thus develop distrust, they may restrict or even terminate their platform activities. In the long run, these developments endanger SNS platforms’ financial viability and undermine their ability to create individual and social value. By applying a justice perspective, this study aims to understand the means at the disposal of SNS providers to leverage the privacy concerns and trusting beliefs of their users—two important determinants of user participation on SNSs. Considering that SNSs have a global appeal, empirical tests assess the effectiveness of justice measures for three culturally distinct countries: Germany, Russia and Morocco. The results indicate that these measures are particularly suited to address trusting beliefs of SNS audience. Specifically, in all examined countries, procedural justice and the awareness dimension of informational justice improve perceptions of trust in the SNS provider. Privacy concerns, however, are not as easy to manage, because the impact of justice-based measures on privacy concerns is not universal. Beyond theoretical value, this research offers valuable practical insights into the use of justice-based measures to promote trust and mitigate privacy concerns in a cross-cultural setting.