We trust in government, just not in yours: Race, partisanship, and political trust, 1958–2012
Introduction
It is widely held that democracies work better if citizens trust their government (Arneil, 2006, Dahl, 1956, Hetherington, 2005, Uslaner, 2002). Societies with greater political trust tend to have citizens who talk to each other, who work together, and who generally get along (Dahl, 1956, Mara, 2001, Newton, 2008, Putnam, 1995). As Hetherington (2005) so succinctly put it, trust matters.
Of key concern for scholars in the U.S. is the relationship between race and trust. Because there is nothing about skin color and physical appearance per se that should affect trust, the presence of such a relationship indicates that the political system is less responsive and less accessible to the members of particular groups, or at the very least, that particular groups perceive the political system as less responsive and accessible. For this reason, there has been a concerted effort to identify which causes of trust have race-varying effects in order to further understand the mechanisms through which this form of political inequality operates (Abramson, 1983, Avery, 2006, Citrin et al., 1975, Hetherington, 1998, Howell and Fagan, 1988, Mangum, 2011, Marshall and Shah, 2007, Miller, 1974, Putnam, 2001).
Among the correlates of trust identified as most important are assessments of political incumbents, of the electoral system, of public policy, and of the economy (Citrin and Luks, 2001, Hetherington, 2005, Keele, 2007). These, it is held, have differential effects on the trust of Black and White Americans because political trust reflects different considerations for each group. For Black Americans, trust is reflective of a deep malaise with the political system reflecting decades of political exclusion and violence (Abramson, 1983, Jung and Kwon, 2013, Nunnally, 2012). In contrast, for White Americans, trust represents short-term satisfaction with the current administration (Avery, 2006, Avery, 2007, Avery, 2008).
This research on whether there is racial variability in the causes and meaning of political trust has identified how the causes of trust matter within particular years, but it has yet to consider racial differences in political trust over time. There are reasons to suspect that conclusions concerning the impact of short-term satisfaction measures on trust may be time-dependent. Unlike the race gap in social trust (Wilkes, 2011, Smith, 2010), the race gap in political trust is extremely inconsistent. Not only is there a trust difference in some years and not in others, but the relative ranking of which group is more trusting shifts. As a result, inference as to the impact of short-term satisfaction or system discontent based on single-year samples may not be reflective of the general pattern.
Time matters because of partisanship. Not only do Black Americans have a high rate of affiliation with the Democratic Party, but partisans’ trust rises sharply when their party is in office (Keele, 2005). The lower trust of Black Americans, if observed, could be a result of being sampled in a year in which there is a Republican President.2 Single-year analysis cannot address this issue, even with controls for partisanship, because it stems from an exogenous variable that is constant for everyone within a given year. To consider a change in partisan control, and how this might be related to racial differences in trust, requires over-time data. The work presented in this paper is the first to fully address these issues related to time and trust via an analysis of 1958–2012 American National Election Studies.3
Section snippets
Race and political trust
The electoral experience of many Black Americans is characterized by multiple forms of discrimination including overt and covert disenfranchisement, contextual political irregularities, and political minority status (Omi and Winant, 1994, Walters, 2003 Wilson, 2012). Despite claims that with the election of Barak Obama, the U.S. is on its way to becoming a “post-racial” society, empirical evidence demonstrating an ongoing link between race and politics suggests otherwise (Bobo, 1997; Tesler,
Data and measures
To test these expectations I use ANES (American National Election Studies) data from 1958 to 2012. I constructed this dataset by merging the 1958–2008 cumulative data with the 2012 time series data.13 This comprises 24 separate years of data collected between 1958 and 2012. The cumulative data file variables begin with VCF and the 2012 variables are named.
Methods
The ANES data are repeated cross-sectional. I use a linear mixed approach in which individuals are treated as level one, and year is treated as level two (see also Wilkes, 2014).17 This approach allows the differences across individuals and across the trends in trust to be
Findings
Table 2 provides the results from the analysis of the effects of partisanship and short term political assessments on trust for the aggregated population. The first model in this table is an intercept-only model that apportions the variability in trust into its individual and trend components. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) indicates that about 9 percent of the variability in trust is at the year level, and the remainder represents within year differences across individuals. The
Conclusion
Because it is such a fundamental source of inequality in contemporary U.S. society, much attention has been given to race as a marker of other political outcomes. This has been especially true in terms of the level of interest in the relationship between race and trust in government (Abramson, 1983, Citrin et al., 1975, Hetherington, 1998, Howell and Fagan, 1988, Miller, 1974, Putnam, 2000). The generally accepted view is that, whereas for White Americans levels of trust in government reflect
Acknowledgments
I thank Catherine Corrigall-Brown, Claire Durand, Malcolm Fairbrother, Sylvia Fuller, Elizabeth Hirsh, Lily Ivanova, Steven Weldon and the anonymous reviewers for their very helpful comments and advice.
References (78)
Electoral institutions and popular confidence in electoral processes: a cross-national analysis
Electoral Stud.
(2008)Explaining political trust among African Americans: examining demographic, media, and social capital and social network effects
Social Sci. J.
(2011)- et al.
Who trusts? Race, gender and the September 11 rally effect among young adults
Soc. Sci. Res.
(2009) Measuring party support: learners are not independents
Electoral Stud.
(2009)Re-thinking the decline in trust: a comparison of Black and White Americans
Soc. Sci. Res.
(2011)- et al.
Race, representation, and trust: changes in attitudes after the election of a Black Mayor
Public Opin. Q.
(1981) - et al.
Assessing the causes and effects of political trust among U.S. Latinos
Am. Polit. Res.
(2010) Political Attitudes in America
(1983)We’re all in this together: the decline of trust in government, 1958–1996
Diverse Communities: the Problem with Social Capital
(2006)
The sources and consequences of political mistrust among African Americans
Am. Polit. Res.
Race, partisanship, and political trust following Bush versus Gore (2000)
Polit. Behav.
Political mistrust among African Americans and support for the political system
Polit. Res. Q.
The transformation of the southern democratic party
J. Polit.
Race, public opinion, and the social sphere
Public Opin. Q.
Race, sociopolitical participation, and Black empowerment
Am. Polit. Sci. Rev.
A broken public? Americans’ responses to the great recession
Am. Sociol. Rev.
Comment: The political relevance of trust in government
The Am. Polit. Sci. Rev.
Presidential leadership and the resurgence of trust in government
Br. J. Polit. Sci.
Political trust revisited: Déjà vu all over again?
Personal and political sources of political alienation
Br. J. Polit. Sci.
White reactions to Black Candidates: when does race matter?
Public Opin. Q.
The skeptical American: revisiting the meanings of trust in government and confidence in institutions
J. Polit.
A Preface to Democratic Theory
The multilevel analysis of trends with repeated cross-sectional data
Sociol. Methodol.
Does inequality erode social trust? Results from multilevel models of US states and countries
Soc. Sci. Res.
A conversation with Condelezza Rice
Du Bois Rev.
Spirals of trust? The effect of descriptive representation on the relationship between citizens and their government
Am. J. Polit. Sci.
Seeing difference: the effect of economic disparity on Black attitudes toward Latinos
Am. J. Polit. Sci.
Parties, institutional control, and trust in government
Social Sci. Q.
Why Americans Hate Welfare
The determinants of public attitudes toward the welfare state
Soc. Forces
The political relevance of political trust
Am. Polit. Sci. Rev.
Why Trust Matters: Declining Political Trust and the Demise of American Liberalism
Political trust and racial policy preferences
Am. J. Polit. Sci.
How trust matters: the changing political relevance of political trust
Am. J. Polit. Sci.
Is it the middle that is frustrated? American’s ideological positions and governmental trust
Am. Polit. Res.
Cited by (0)
- 1
The UBC is located on traditional Musqueam territory.