Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trust/Distrust: Impact on Engaged Learning

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Mobile Teaching and Learning

  • 59 Accesses

Abstract

Today’s youth experience life with and through their cell/smart phones. In researching the impact of mobile technology on literacy practices, I found that while access to phones and digital spaces was not a significant issue, trust was. Trust generalizes from social interactions and is positively associated with trusting of unknown others. Those who trust are comfortable engaging with others not previously known; they trust that others, through association, have similar interests and will behave in certain, predictable, positive ways. The willingness to be open to and actively engage with others is assumed. Prior experiences impact how we trust. While mobile technology can lead us to doors that open into new spaces and places, the how and why of one’s trust determines not only if that door is opened but the type and level of engagement and interaction entered. When distrust is present, the ethos of participatory cultures (engage, participate, collaborate, cooperate, and disperse knowledge) is undermined. Distrust is different from low trust, with much stronger and deeper emotional roots. We cannot assume that because youth have technology and seemed to be constantly engaged with it means they are willing to participate, collaborate, cooperative in all places and spaces. Understanding why and where an individual’s trust/distrust is situated is important to understanding how and why they choose to engage in online/digital spaces. To realize the benefits of mobile learning and the online and classroom spaces characterized by collaboration, social connection, and distributed knowledge, we must acknowledge the diversity of engagement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie, J., and A. Howson. 2005. “Leaps of faith” and MMR: An empirical study of trust. Sociology 39 (2): 221–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y.S., and S.R. Fang. 2013. Antecedents and distinctions between online trust and distrust: Predicting high- and low-risk Internet behaviors. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 14 (2): 149–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, K., Cheshire, C., Gerbasi, A., and Aven, B. 2009. Assessing trustworthiness in providers. eTrust: Forming relationships in the online world, New York, NY: Russell Sage, 189–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope, B., and M. Kalantzis. 2000. Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. South Yarra: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimoka, A. 2010. What does the brain tell us about trust and distrust? Evidence from a functional neuroimaging study. Mis Quarterly, 373–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuFour, R., R. DuFour, and R. Eaker. 2008. Revisiting learning communities at work, new insights for improving schools. Bloomington: Solution Tree.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumouchel, P. 2005. Trust as an action. European Journal of Sociology 46: 417–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ess, C.M. 2010. Trust and new communication technologies: Vicious circles, virtuous circles, possible futures. Knowledge, Technology, and Policy 23: 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. 1995. Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gefen, D. 2000. E-commerce: The role of familiarity and trust. Omega 28: 725–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanville, J.L., and P. Paxton. 2007. How do we learn to trust? A confirmatory tetrad analysis of the sources of generalized trust. Social Psychology Quarterly 70 (3): 230–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanville, J.L., M.A. Anderson, and P. Paxton. 2013. Do social connections create trust? Social Psychology Quarterly 70: 230–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckscher, C. 2015. Trust in a complex world. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoff, M.J. 2014. The impact of new technology on literacy practices: An urban perspective. Order number 3621206. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://search-proquest-com.ezp.lib.rochester.edu/pqdtglobal/docview/1541549574/E9B635A58E0542F3PQ/1?accountid=13567. Accessed 3 Dec 2018.

  • Hoff, M.J. 2016. “I don’t conversate with those I don’t know”: The role of trust/distrust in online engagement. Digital Culture & Education 8 (2): 90–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M., and G. Vaughan. 2005. Introduction to social psychology. 4th ed. Sydney: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, M.H., T.L. Lu, C.H. Yen, and C.M. Chang. 2007. Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities: The relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 65: 153–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, E.N.M., and N. Walid. 2014. Trust contributing factors in m-learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 129: 554–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ito, M., S. Baumer, M. Bittanti, d. boyd, R. Cody, B. Herr-Stephenson, …, and L. Tripp. 2010. Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. 2006. Fans, bloggers, and gamers: Exploring participatory culture. New York: NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H., K. Clinton, R. Purushotma, A.J. Robison, and M. Weigel. 2009. Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G.R., and J.M. George. 1998. The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of Management Review 23 (3): 531–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassin, S. 2005. Social pyschology. 6th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. 2010. A taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity, ed. R. Frodeman, J. Klein, and C. Mitcham. Detroit: Wayne State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R.M. 1999. Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology 50: 569–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuan, H.H., and G.W. Bock. 2005. The collective reality of trust: An investigation of social relations and networks on trust in multi-channel retailers. In Proceedings of the 13th European conference on information systems, Regensburg, 26–28 May 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lankshear, C., and M. Knobel. 2011. New literacies: Everyday practices and social learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R.J., D.J. McAllister, and R.J. Bies. 1998. Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review 23 (3): 438–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowry, P.B., R.M. Scheutzler, J.S. GIboney, and T.A. Gregory. 2015. Is trust always better than distrust? The potential value of distrust in virtual teams engaged in short-term decision making. Group Decision and Negotiation 24: 723–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. 1979. Trust and power. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackely, A. 2013. Murmuration: Building a participatory culture. Teacher Librarian 40 (4): 23–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, S. 1994. Optimism and pessimism in trust. In Proceedings of the Ibero-American Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Caracas, Venezuela), J. Ramirez, Ed., McGraw-Hill Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R.C., J.H. Davis, and F.D. Schoorman. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review 20 (3): 709–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, D.H., and N.L. Chervany. 2001. What trust means in e-commerce customer relationships: An interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6 (2): 35–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, D.H., L.L. Cummings, and N.L. Chervany. 1998. Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review 23 (3): 473–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, D.H., C.J. Kacmar, and V. Choudhury. 2004. Dispositional trust and distrust distinctions in predicting high- and low-risk internet expert advice site perceptions. e-Service Journal 3 (2): 35–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. 1995. Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist 50 (9): 741–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D.M., and R.M. Kramer. 2001. Trust as a form of shallow morality. In Trust in society, ed. K.S. Cook, 89–117. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Möllering, G. 2002. Perceived trustworthiness and inter-firm governance: Empirical evidence from the UK printing industry. Cambridge Journal of Economics 26 (2): 139–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooradian, T., B. Renzl, and K. Matzler. 2006. Who trusts? Personality, trust and knowledge sharing. Management Learning 37 (4): 523–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nepal, S., W. Sherchan, and C. Paris. 2012. Building trust communities using social trust. International conference on user modeling, adaptation, and personalization. In Advances in user modeling, Girona, 243–255, 11–15 Jul 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonnecke, B., J. Preece, D. Andrews, and R. Voutour. 2004. Online lurkers tell why. In Proceedings of the tenth Americas conference on information systems, 1–7. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paxton, P. 2007. Association memberships and generalized trust: A multilevel model across 31 countries. Social Forces 86 (1): 47–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, S., M.C. Mont, and S. Crane. 2005. Persistent and dynamic trust: Analysis and the related impact of trusted platforms. In Trust management, 355–363. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S., K.A. Thomas, Pl DeScioli, and O.S. Hague. 2004. The psychology of coordination and common knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 107 (4): 657–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R.D. 2000. Bowling alone. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridings, C.M., D. Gefen, and B. Arinze. 2002. Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11 (3): 271–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotter, J.B. 1980. Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness, and gullibility. American Psychologist 35 (1): 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D.M., S.B. Sitkin, R.S. Burt, and C. Camerer. 1998. Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review 23 (3): 393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, N.L., G. Dietz, and A. Thornhill. 2014. Trust and distrust: Polar opposites, or independent but co-existing? Journal of Human Resources 67 (6): 639–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoorman, R.D., R.C. Mayer, and J.H. Davis. 2007. An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review 32: 334–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shercan, W., S. Nepal, and C. Paris. 2013. A survey of trust in social networks. ACM Computing Surveys 45 (4): Article 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolle, D. 2001. Getting to trust: An analysis of the importance of institutions, families, personal experiences and group membership. In Social capital and participation in everyday life, 118–133. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sully de Luque, M.F., and M. Javidan. 2004. Uncertainty avoidance. In Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies, ed. R.J. House, P.J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P.W. Dorfman, and V. Gupta, 602–652. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi, T. 2011. Trust: The evolutionary game of mind and society. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, B., and M.P. Singh. 2000. A social mechanism for reputation management in electronic communities. In Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on cooperative information agents (CIA ’00), 154–165. Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, B., and M.P. Singh. 2002. An evidential model of distributed reputation management. In Proceedings of the 1st international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS ’02), 294–301. New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teaching and Curriculum, Warner School of Education and Human Development, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA

    Martha J. Hoff

Authors
  1. Martha J. Hoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martha J. Hoff .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CEO, WEMOSOFT, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

    Yu (Aimee) Zhang

  2. Teaching and Learning, The Ohio State University, Upper Arlington, OH, USA

    Dean Cristol

Section Editor information

  1. Faculty of College of Education and Human Ecology, The Ohio State University at Lima, Lima, Ohio, USA

    Hea-Jin Lee

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Hoff, M.J. (2019). Trust/Distrust: Impact on Engaged Learning. In: Zhang, Y., Cristol, D. (eds) Handbook of Mobile Teaching and Learning. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_125-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_125-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41981-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41981-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation