The second study explored the reciprocal associations between older and younger siblings' educational expectations from early/middle adolescence to middle/late adolescence and from middle/late adolescence to young adulthood. In this study it was tested the moderating role of family immigrant context and sibling characteristics in the association between older and younger siblings' educational expectations. Findings revealed that older siblings' educational expectations at T1 predicted younger siblings' educational expectations at T2. Further, older siblings' educational expectations at T2 continued to influence younger siblings' educational expectations at T3, and younger siblings' educational expectations at T2 also predicted older siblings' educational expectations at T3. Family immigrant context moderated the association from older siblings' educational expectations at T2 to younger siblings' educational expectations at T3, such that the association was significant for immigrant-born families, but not for U.S.-born/Mixed-status families. Our study highlights the value of siblings' roles, particularly in immigrant families, as youth make important decisions about their educational pursuits.
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.