Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Declining citizen trust in government is an important driver for NPM-style reforms. Increasing people’s knowledge by providing factual knowledge about government performance outcomes is seen as an important way of increasing citizen trust in government. Does this promise hold or is knowledge about performance outcomes not that important? Two rivalling hypotheses are being investigated. One proposition postulates a link between knowledge and trust, whereas the alternative hypothesis borrows from social-psychological research arguing that subconscious and affective cues are more important. In order to investigate this question, this article presents the results of an experiment (N = 658) investigating the effect of performance outcome transparency on citizen trust in a specific government organization. Four groups visited different websites with varying degrees of transparency and performance outcome. The results demonstrate that the link between transparency and trust in a government organization is determined by a mix of knowledge and feelings. Further, the overall effect of transparency is limited. Pre-existing and fundamental ideas about what government does and whether it is benign or not are far more determining than a single experience with a government organization. This article concludes that knowledge about performance outcomes is only part of the link between transparency and trust, and that more realistic views about transparency’s effects should be developed.

Points for practitioners

Transparency is generally hailed by many as the key to trust in government. This study shows that the magnitude of transparency on citizens’ trust in government is often exaggerated as most people have pre-existing, fundamental beliefs about government which are only marginally influenced by transparency. However, transparency can contribute to maintaining existing trust levels through a mix of people’s cognition and feeling about government. Transparency is necessary, yet professionals in public management and administration should develop realistic expectations about what transparency can really achieve for trust in government.

Keywords

accountability public sector reform transparency trust

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Birkinshaw

(2006) Freedom of information and openness: Fundamental human rights. Administrative Law Review 58(1): 177–218.

Blau

(1964) Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley.

Blendon

Benson

Morin

Altman

Brodie

Brossard

(1997) Changing attitudes in America. In: Nye

Zelikow

King

(eds) Why People Don’t Trust Government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 205–216.

Bok

(1997) Measuring the performance of government. In: Nye

Zelikow

King

(eds) Why People Don’t Trust Government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 55–75.

Bouckaert

Van de Walle

(2003) Comparing measures of citizen trust and user satisfaction as indicators of ‘good governance’: Difficulties in linking trust and satisfaction indicators. International Review of Administrative Sciences 69(3): 329–343.

Bozeman

Scott

(1992) Laboratory experiments in public policy and management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2(3): 293–313.

Cook

Jacobs

Kim

(2010) Trusting what you know: Information, knowledge, and confidence in social security. Journal of Politics 72(2): 397–412.

Cook

Gronke

(2005) The skeptical American: Revisiting the meanings of trust in government and confidence in institutions. Journal of Politics 67(3): 784–803.

Damasio

(1994) Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. New York: Putman.

10.

Dawes

(2010) Stewardship and usefulness: Policy principles for information-based transparency. Government Information Quarterly 27: 377–383.

11.

Drew

Nyerges

(2004) Transparency of environmental decision making: A case study of soil cleanup inside the Hanford 100 area. Journal of Risk Research 7(1): 33–71.

12.

Etzioni

(2010) Is transparency the best disinfectant?. Journal of Political Philosophy 18(4): 389–404.

13.

Field

(2005) Discovering Statistic Using SPSS: And Sex Drugs and Rock ‘n’ Roll, 2nd edn. London: Sage.

14.

Florini

(1998) The end of secrecy. Foreign Policy 111: 50–63.

15.

Gerring

Thacker

(2004) Political institutions and corruption: The role of unitarism and parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science 34: 295–330.

16.

Grimmelikhuijsen

Welch

(2012) Developing and testing a theoretical framework for computer-mediated transparency of local governments. Public Administration Review (forthcoming).

17.

Heald

(2006) Varieties of transparency. In: Hood

Heald

(eds) Transparency: The Key to Better Governance?. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 25–43.

18.

Hetherington

(1998) The political relevance of political trust. American Political Science Review 92(4): 791–808.

19.

Hibbing

Theiss-Moore

(1995) Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

20.

Hibbing

Theiss-Moore

(2001) Stealth Democracy: American’s Beliefs about How Government Should Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

21.

Hood

(2006) Beyond exchanging first principles? Some closing comments. In: Hood

Heald

(eds) Transparency: The Key to Better Governance?. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 211–226.

22.

Kjaer

(2004) Governance. Malden, MA: Polity Press.

23.

Larsson

(1998) How open can government be? The Swedish experience. In: Deckmyn

Thomson

(eds) Openness and Transparency in the European Union. Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration, 39–51.

24.

Levi

Stoker

(2000) Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science 3: 375–507.

25.

Lewis

Weigert

(1985) Trust as a social reality. Social Forces 63(4): 967–985.

26.

Lindblom

(1959) The science of ‘muddling through’. Public Administration Review 19(2): 79–88.

27.

Luhmann

(1979) Trust and Power. Chichester: Wiley.

28.

Lynch

Jr (1982) On the external validity of experiments in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 9(3): 225–239.

29.

McAllister

(1995) Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal 38(1): 24–59.

30.

McKnight

Choudhury

Kacmar

(2002) Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research 13(3): 334–359.

31.

McNabb

(2009) The New Face of Government: How Public Managers are Forging a New Approach to Governance. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.

32.

March

(1978) Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. Bell Journal of Economics 9(2): 587–608.

33.

Mayer

Davis

Schoorman

(1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review 20(3): 709–734.

34.

Meijer

(2007) Publishing public performance results on the Internet: Do stakeholders use the Internet to hold Dutch public service organizations to account?. Government Information Quarterly 24: 165–185.

35.

Mishra

(1996) Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In: Kramer

Tyler

(eds) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 261–287.

36.

Mondak

Carmines

Huckfeldt

Mitchell

Schraufnagel

(2007) Does familiarity breed contempt? The impact of information on mass attitudes toward Congress. American Journal of Political Science 51(1): 34–48.

37.

Norris

(2001) Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

38.

Nye

Zelikow

King

(1997) Why People Don’t Trust Government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

39.

O’Neill

(2002) A Question of Trust. The BBC Reith Lectures 2002. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

40.

Park

Blenkinsopp

(2011) The roles of transparency and trust in the relationship between corruption and citizen satisfaction. International Review of Administrative Sciences 77: 254–274.

41.

Peters

Covello

McCallum

(1997) The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical study. Risk Analysis 17(1): 43–54.

42.

Pina

Lourdes

Royo

(2007) Are ICTs improving transparency and accountability in the EU regional and local governments? An empirical study. Public Administration 85(2): 449–472.

43.

Piotrowski

Van Ryzin

(2007) Citizen attitudes toward transparency in local government. American Review of Public Administration 37(3): 306–323.

44.

Pollitt

Bouckaert

(2004) Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

45.

Relly

Sabharwal

(2009) Perceptions of transparency of government policymaking: A cross-national study. Government Information Quarterly 26(1): 148–157.

46.

Rousseau

Sitkin

Burt

Camerer

(1998) Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review 23(3): 393–404.

47.

Simon

(1957) Models of Man: Social and Rational. Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

48.

Snellen

ITM

(1998) Street level bureaucracy in an information age. In: Snellen

ITM

Van den Donk

WBHJ

(eds) Public Administration in an Information Age: A Handbook. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 497–505.

49.

Stone

(2002) Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making, 2nd rev. edn. New York: WW Norton, original work published 1988.

50.

Thaler

Sunstein

(2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. London: Yale University Press.

51.

Tiemeijer

(2011) Hoe Mensen Keuzes Maken: De Psychologie van het Beslissen. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

52.

Tolbert

Mossberger

(2006) The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review 66(3): 354–369.

53.

Van de Walle

(2011) New public management: Restoring the public trust through creating distrust?. In: Christensen

Lægreid

(eds) Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management Aldershot: Ashgate.

54.

Van de Walle

Roberts

(2008) Publishing performance information: An illusion of control?. In: Van Dooren

Van de Walle

(eds) Performance Information in the Public Sector: How it is Used. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 211–226.

55.

Welch

Hinnant

Moon

(2005) Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(3): 371–391.

56.

Zajonc

(1984) On the primacy of affect. American Psychologist 39(2): 117–123.

57.

Zucker

(1986) Production of trust: Institutional sources of economics structures, 1840–1920. In: Staw

Cummings

(eds) Research in Organizational Behavior. Vol. 8. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 53–122.

Linking transparency,knowledge and citizen trust in government: an experiment

Abstract

Points for practitioners

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References