Trust is one of the most teasing and vague notions in sociology. Trust is widely used in both everyday language and scientific discourse as taken for granted and not presumed to have any special interpretations or contextually determined situational definitions. Moreover, the field of trust research is interdisciplinary, generating differing theoretical and practical contributions to the field of trust studies. Thus, to study trust, first, we are to identify its key elements such as the causes and effects of trust (and distrust); practical implications of different ‘types’ and ‘levels’ of trust; widely accepted conceptualizations of trust; and the prevailing definition of trust (as a means of coping with uncertainty). Second, we are to summarize the intentions and procedures of the empirical study of trust within quantitative and qualitative approaches. In the former case, the focus is social and political trust measured in largescale surveys, often in the comparative perspective. While the latter seeks to understand what trust means for people and why members of society prefer to speak about trust using specific words in particular situations (i.e. the discursive construction of trust).
Narrative analysis seems to be a perfect methodological decision (provided there is enough ‘quantitative’ and ‘qualitative’ data to contextualize its findings for correct interpretation) to identify the typological discursive constitution of trust in everyday relations and practices. The author illustrates such a potential of narrative analysis on a collection of transcripts of semistructured interviews with local populations (not experts in management or administrative staff of municipal and regional bodies) conducted in rural regions of Russia over the last decade (2006–2015).
© 2001-2026 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados