Out of Sight, Out of Group? Testing the Validity of Generalized Trust as a Proxy for Intergroup Attitudes, Risk Taking, and Behavior

Generalized trust (GT) is a conspicuous double barreled question, with ‘trust in most people’ or ‘being careful’ as extremes. It is used in many studies on ethnic diversity and intergroup relations. While the diversity-trust nexus is often debated, few have focused on systematic response bias in GT. Evidence whether this survey item taps into prejudice or whether it represents a more general measure of trust or risk attitude is lacking. Across two large laboratory studies and two online studies (with Dutch, American and British samples on Prolific), the validity of GT as a proxy for intergroup attitudes (feeling thermometers and preference), implicit prejudice (an adapted Race IAT), or general risk taking is examined. Moreover, I investigate the behavioral validity of GT by assessing its relation to a Trust Game, Social/Digital Distance, and an Investment Task. The lab studies allow the most control over participants’ behavior, while external validity of these findings is confirmed through the online studies. As data collection in the lab started prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, I leverage this source of random variation to investigate the impact of a natural hazard on GT and Social Distance towards out-groups versus in-groups. I limit the samples to the majority white and focus on their attitudes and behavior towards stigmatized minorities – either Dutch Moroccans or British and American Blacks. These constitute most likely cases to find the strongest effect sizes.