Filtering by
- Creators: Kane, Kevin
- Creators: Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
- Creators: Schilke, Oliver
The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.
The power of language in leadership positions and social movements is well established. Charismatic Language patterns have been identified as effective for influencing perception and decision-making. This study examines the use of Charismatic Language in a court of law through a randomized survey of different treatments of oral arguments in a homicide case. Results show that Charismatic Language used by the prosecution is less likely to influence a jury and can even dissuade their decision. Additionally, the study finds that Charismatic Language used by a female attorney may hinder the argument's reliability to a jury.