The Importance of Trust in Building Strong Relationships

Source: DexonDee/Shutterstock

Numerous definitions of trust can be found in diverse disciplines, including sociology (e.g., Coleman, 1990), social psychology (Deutsch, 1958), political science (Miller, 1974), economics (Williamson, 1993), and communication studies (Kohring & Matthes, 2007).

Some examples:

• According to Kohring and Matthes (2007), the theoretical basis for the concept of trust in news media is based on selectivity—that is to say, trust in news media means trust in an outlet's specific selectivity rather than in objectivity or truth.
• “Trust is defined as a willingness to rely on an exchange partner in whom one has confidence” (Moorman, Deshpande & Zaltman, 1993).
• “We define trust in terms of confident positive expectations regarding another’s conduct” (Lewicki & Bies, 1998).
• “An individual may be said to have trust in the occurrence of an event if he expects its occurrence and his expectations lead to behavior which he perceives to have greater negative consequences if the expectation is not confirmed than positive motivational consequences if it is confirmed” (Deutsch, 1958).

Despite these scholarly efforts, trust remains an intractable concept for many. Yet, despite the contradictory viewpoints on, and subsequent definitions of, the term, there is a certain consensus on the basic and most important meaning of trust, i.e., that it is necessary and present when the actors (the trustors) cannot or do not want to control the actions of their interactants, expecting a certain action on the part of these alteri (trustees) (Quandt, 2012).

As we may guess, these expectations are primarily based on an experience(s), which can be based on both a former personal experience and any other experience connected with the same or similar actors under the same and/or similar circumstances and situations. Here, the emotional background knowledge comes to the fore and plays an irreplaceable role in guiding the communicators throughout the whole speech event (Rostomyan, 2012). Here, the cooperation of the interactants, especially a communicative interaction, becomes possible based on a mutually shared background knowledge that makes fluent and flawless interaction possible. It is generally believed that the expected actions of the trustees will not have an emotionally negative impact on the trustors later on; moreover, the effects and consequences are supposed to be beneficial for both parties.

In social communication especially, there is always a certain need for trust because of the problem of societal complexity and contingency of events in social constellations (Quandt, 2012), where there should be mutual expectations of the parties involved that would be beneficial for both of them. As everyday events cannot be fully foreseen or predicated, there is always a certain need for trust between interactants to develop safely grounded expectations of the outcome of events which serves as a secure basis for successful social action and interaction. Hence, trust is undoubtedly a crucial characteristic feature of societal communication irrespective of logical or emotional reasons, since its lack can result in societal malfunction. This fact leads to the observation that for building successful relationships within the frames of this or that cultural or subcultural society, there is an urgent need to first build trust between interactants, which sometimes seems to be dwindling today.

According to Quandt (2012), there are various types of trustees; for example, trust in people one knows quite well based on their close relationship status. When the interactants possess a large amount of information about each other concerning different fields, which accompanies both sides of the interlocutors during the whole speech event, it makes their mutual actions to a greater degree predictable; and there is trust in people whom we do not know well.

Many researchers consider the first type of the aforementioned trustees as irrelevant, as there is always a natural propensity in trusting in people who stand close to us, yet we do consider it as relevant since a lot of what happens in the process of communication occurs on the basis of emotional background knowledge, making the act of any joint communication possible on the basis of trust.