In addition to the main research question, we develop the sub-question: Why
does trust in political institutions affect the nature of participation?
This report seeks to explore these questions by presenting evidence based on
secondary data. The time frame covered in the case studies spans from the early
1950’s up to 2021. We have also limited our research to the United Kingdom and
the United States. This report is organised into several sections. Firstly, we will
explain what trust (institutionalised and non-institutionalised) is. Secondly, it will
describe what participation is and what is conventional and unconventional
participation, and then analyse the relationship between levels of trust in
institutions and participation. In order, to answer these questions, we will use
four carefully selected case studies: Watergate (the impact it had on voting), the
Iraq War Protests, the Sit-in Protests and Storming of the US Capitol. The last
part of the report is devoted to a carefully prepared discussion additionally
delving into why trust affects the nature of participation.
2). What is Trust?
2.1). What is trust?
The literature defines trust in a number of ways. Firstly, Delhey & Newton define
trust as the belief that others will not deliberately or knowingly do us harm if
they can avoid it and will look after our interests if that is possible (2005, p.311).
The subjective probability with which one agent assesses that another agent will perform a particular action independently of his capacity to be able to monitor it (Gambetta, 1988, p.317).
However, this definition was derived from Gambetta’s definition and altered to
allude to social trust. Therefore, this report will refer to trust as:
47
Made with FlippingBook HTML5