Do you tell a relatively new colleague your insecurities about your work? Are you letting a friend look after your dog for a weekend? Do you leave the neighbor alone in your house for half an afternoon if he has forgotten his key and you have to leave yourself?
These examples revolve around trust – the feeling or belief that someone will not harm you. “Trust is the social glue for everything, for friendships and other relationships,” says Paul van Lange, professor of social psychology at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam. He has been researching cooperation, social behavior and conflict between individuals and groups for years. Trust is one of his favorite topics: “It is one of the most important things you can explore.”
This is also the opinion of Catrin Finkenauer, professor of youth studies at Interdisciplinary Social Science at Utrecht University. “It is a very underestimated subject, about which we still know too little.” She has done a lot of research into trust in all kinds of relationships, including in situations of damaged trust, such as child abuse.
The professors answer five questions about trust.
1. How do you build trust?
What makes people who don’t know each other yet trust each other? People often immediately think, says Paul van Lange, that people must be similar to this. That they must have the same group characteristics, such as skin color, social status, religion or political preference. “But in practice, one-on-one contact is much more important for building trust.”
There are at least three reasons for this, he says. “Firstly, one-on-one contact facilitates reciprocity and a kind of mental accounting, perhaps not always completely consciously. You do something for someone, that person does something for you. This way you can build trust very quickly. For example, you have this very strongly with other parents, a kind of business relationship in which you take care of each other’s children. Secondly, one-on-one contact quickly leads to empathy, you easily put yourself in the shoes of others. If you feel heard and see that the other person is involved, this also builds trust. And thirdly, you cannot be left out in one-on-one contact. That brings a feeling of security. Coalitions are not possible, so no groups will face each other.”
It turns out that most and the best interactions that people have are one-on-one research by Van Lange and his colleagues. “You see many more pairs on the street, in parks, in cafes and restaurants than groups of other sizes. When you ask people about their most recent contact, it was usually one-on-one. And the most positive recent contact too.”
Differences in skin color or other group characteristics disappear into the background, says Van Lange, as soon as you have one-on-one contact. “But are you going to interact?” That’s the point, says Van Lange. “Are you going to talk to your neighbor with a different political preference?”
Catrin Finkenauer fears that people often will not do that. “In general you see that segregation in society is increasing. In the past, the doctor married the nurse, today the doctor marries the doctor.”
“Once there is contact,” thinks Paul van Lange, “it will be positive in nine out of ten cases.” But differences in group characteristics can be a barrier. Similarity is simply a source of familiarity. Similarity in, for example, gender, age, political preference, but also similarity in musical preference. “You can use those other characteristics,” says Van Lange, “to ensure that political preference becomes less important.”
What then helps to build trust with someone you see more often, he says, is to keep the norm in your mental accounting to give just a little more than you got. “Well, in the Dutch way, don’t exaggerate. But if you are spontaneous and personal, it fuels trust.” Give a compliment, show that you are thinking of someone, and give people a little slack if they don’t always do the same with you right away.
2. Is everyone basically equally trusting?
No definitely not. But there are also no very clear differences when it comes to age or gender, for example. Trust is largely determined by experiences with other people, Van Lange and Finkenauer emphasize. “In general, people trust their own family members the most,” says Finkenauer. But not always. People also differ in how much they trust the government, or other people in general. “People who have been robbed, for example, may have confidence in the government, but not in ‘the average other’. And some people do not trust institutions, but they do have a lot of trust in other people. In any case, trust is a luxury. In a safe country, where everything is well organised, you can afford to have more confidence.” And vice versa: “Trust and a safe and fair environment reinforce each other,” says Finkenauer.
3. What determines whether someone is easily trusted?
There are three aspects to this, says Finkenauer. First: reliability, predictability of behavior. “Does anyone have self-control? Does he keep his agreements? If he says he’s on a diet, will he still have an extra cookie? Is he passing on secrets when he promised not to?” Second: evidence of honesty, transparency. “Is it clear that someone is honest, is that person transparent in their behavior and motivations?” And thirdly: competence, knowledge of one’s own capabilities. “The fact that someone can look at themselves and think: I need to bring in someone else who can do this – that is confidence-inspiring behavior.”
4. How is trust damaged?
Yes, quite easy. “I once did a project about contested divorces,” says Finkenauer. “Then I saw: if one of the partners rolls his eyes once, it’s over, they can no longer have a conversation. It can be very small things that people in relationships pay close attention to.”
Higher-ups can also undermine the confidence of the people below them. If your boss or someone from the government behaves dishonestly, it reduces trust between people (subordinates, citizens). That Van Lange and colleagues showed in a game situation in which someone supervised two players who he could punish: if the supervisor was clearly unfair, the two players cooperated less often and chose their own interests more often. It was already known that in societies with more corrupt institutions, mutual trust between people is also lower; this research suggests that the connection is causal. The honesty of political leaders can therefore determine whether people will trust each other. “I hope that politicians will take this finding to heart,” says Van Lange.
In that respect, Finkenauer also fears the effect of all world problems, especially their unpredictability. “Wars, climate change, right-wing extremism… This makes people insecure and that affects how we interact with each other.”
5. How do you restore damaged trust?
That’s difficult. If you’ve broken someone’s trust, that person must forgive you before they can trust you again, Van Lange says. For that you must first apologize. “That is an important predictor of forgiveness. But expressing regret should be a good thing. People often act as if it is very easy.”
Is not. Simply saying ‘sorry’ certainly doesn’t work. According to Van Lange, a good expression of remorse must meet four conditions: “You must admit guilt, take responsibility for what you have done. You have to be very precise about this, it must be clear what you are talking about. It must also be clear that you are taking the other person’s perspective: you must explain what it has meant to the other person and that you realize that. And finally, that sounds a bit childish but it is important, you have to promise not to do it again.” And then you can start building trust again – see question 1. Also quite a job.
And that is the optimistic answer. Catrin Finkenauer wonders whether it is at all possible to repair trust that has really been damaged. “We don’t know enough about that. People can hurt each other so much. I was a professor of child abuse at the Vrije Universiteit and in that field you notice: something is broken and we don’t know what it takes to repair it robustly and sustainably. Trust is a human thing, you have to live up to it every day. You see that a lot in care. Then a care provider says ‘you are safe with me’, but then that care provider has a sick child and cancels an appointment, and then the damaged person still thinks: see, I have to do it myself, I can continue on no one build. We often expect people to be fixed when they are no longer abused, but they are certainly not.”
Finkenauer is therefore a lot more pessimistic about restoring trust than Paul van Lange. “Paul has not worked with traumatized people,” she says dryly. “And there are more and more traumatized people. Trust is also not something you can claim, people cannot regulate whether they trust someone. Both parties have to want it – and work hard for it.” But with the initiative of one party, says Van Lange, there is at least a start.