What does it mean to "trust?" What makes us feel secure enough to place our confidence—even at times our welfare—in the hands of other people? Is it possible to "trust" an institution? What exactly do people mean when they claim to "distrust" their governments? As difficult as it may be to define, trust is essential to the formation and maintenance of a civil society. In Trust and Trustworthiness political scientist Russell Hardin addresses the standard theories of trust and articulates his own new and compelling idea: that much of what we call trust can be best described as "encapsulated interest."

Research into the roles of trust in our society has offered a broad range of often conflicting theories. Some theorists maintain that trust is a social virtue that cannot be reduced to strategic self-interest; others claim that trusting another person is ultimately a rational calculation based on information about that person and his or her incentives and motivations. Hardin argues that we place our trust in persons whom we believe to have strong reasons to act in our best interests. He claims that we are correct when we assume that the main incentive of those whom we trust is to maintain a relationship with us—whether it be for reasons of economic benefit or for love and friendship. Hardin articulates his theory using examples from a broad array of personal and social relationships, paying particular attention to explanations of the development of trusting relationships. He also examines trustworthiness and seeks to understand why people may behave in ways that violate their own self-interest in order to honor commitments they have made to others. The book also draws important distinctions between vernacular uses of "trust" and "trustworthiness," contrasting, for example, the type of trust (or distrust) we place in individuals with the trust we place in institutions

Trust and Trustworthiness represents the culmination of important new research into the roles of trust in our society; it offers a challenging new voice in the current discourse about the origins of cooperative behavior and its consequences for social and civic life.

RUSSELL HARDIN is professor of politics at New York University and professor of political science at Stanford University.

A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust

Winner of the 2010 Luebbert Prize for Best Book in Comparative Politics

"There is much to praise in this book. Most importantly, the authors' focus on understanding the mechanism of ethnic cooperation should be highly praised, including the manner in which they tested the major proposed mechanisms against each other. I was also very impressed by the immense amount of fieldwork that the authors devoted to the project, with obvious care given at every stage of the project to obtain meaningful results."
-AFRICAN AFFAIRS

"The authors go beyond the observation that ethnic diversity sometimes impedes cooperation and ask why this might be so. This important work will be an eye opener to those schooled in conventional 'social identity' theory and 'minimal group' experiments. By focusing on causal mechanisms, Coethnicity demonstrates the limitations of simple 'insider favoritism/outsider hostility' interpretations and opens up a new research agenda on ethnic division and cross-ethnic solidarity."
-SAMUEL BOWLES, director, Behavioral Sciences Program, Santa Fe Institute

"Good public policy demands that social scientists go beyond statistical correlations in order to understand the mechanisms that lead to market and government failure. James Habyarimana, Macartan Humphreys, Daniel Posner, and Jeremy Weinstein in Coethnicity have brilliantly, persistently, and innovatively sorted out and identified the mechanisms that undermine the potential of ethnic diversity to enrich society through the gains from trade that ethnic complementarities should provide. From Coethnicity, and now knowing these mechanisms, we are perched to devise remedies that can save us from the lost opportunities of cosmopolitanism and the specter of ethnic cleansing."
-DAVID D. LAITIN, Watkins Professor of Political Science, Stanford University

"An exciting volume with interesting insights into the effects of mixed ethnicity on public goods provision. The authors apply experimental methods in innovative ways to study the mechanisms through which mixed ethnicity hinders cooperation, making the work appropriate for a wide range of readers, from economists to charitable organizations and policy makers."
-ERNST FEHR, director, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, Laboratory for the Study of Social and Neural Systems, University of Zurich

Ethnically homogenous communities often do a better job than diverse communities of producing public goods such as satisfactory schools and health care, adequate sanitation, and low levels of crime. Coethnicity reports the results of a landmark study that aimed to find out why diversity has this cooperation-undermining effect. The study, conducted in a neighborhood of Kampala, Uganda, notable for both its high levels of diversity and low levels of public goods provision, hones in on the mechanisms that might account for the difficulties diverse societies often face in trying to act collectively.

The Mulago-Kyebando Community Study uses behavioral games to explore how the ethnicity of the person with whom one is interacting shapes social behavior. Hundreds of local participants interacted with various partners in laboratory games simulating real-life decisions involving the allocation of money and the completion of joint tasks. Many of the subsequent findings debunk long-standing explanations for diversity’s adverse effects. Contrary to the prevalent notion that shared preferences facilitate ethnic collective action, differences in goals and priorities among participants were not found to be structured along ethnic lines. Nor was there evidence that subjects favored the welfare of their coethnics over that of non-coethnics. When given the opportunity to act altruistically, individuals did not choose to benefit coethnics disproportionately when their actions were anonymous. Yet when anonymity was removed, subjects behaved very differently. With their actions publicly observed, subjects gave significantly more to coethnics, expected their partners to reciprocate, and expected that they would be sanctioned for a failure to cooperate. This effect was most pronounced among individuals who were otherwise least likely to cooperate. These results suggest that what may look like ethnic favoritism is, in fact, a set of reciprocity norms—stronger among coethnics than among non-coethnics—that make it possible for members of more homogeneous communities to take risks, invest, and cooperate without the fear of getting cheated. Such norms may be more subject to change than deeply held ethnic antipathies—a powerful finding for policymakers seeking to design social institutions in diverse societies.

Research on ethnic diversity typically draws on either experimental research or field work. Coethnicity does both. By taking the crucial step from observation to experimentation, this study marks a major breakthrough in the study of ethnic diversity.

JAMES HABYARIMANA is assistant professor of public policy at the Georgetown Public Policy Institute.

MACARTAN HUMPHREYS is associate professor of political science at Columbia University and research scholar at the Center for Globalization and Sustainable Development at the Earth Institute.

DANIEL N. POSNER is associate professor of political science at the University of California, Los Angeles.

JEREMY M. WEINSTEIN is assistant professor of political science at Stanford University and an affiliated faculty member at the Center for Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law and the Center for International Security and Cooperation.

A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust

As the American economy surged in the 1990s, economic sociology made great strides as well. Economists and sociologists worked across disciplinary boundaries to study the booming market as both a product and a producer of culture, tracing the correlations they saw between economic and social phenomena. In the process, they debated the methodological issues that arose from their interdisciplinary perspectives. The New Economic Sociology provides an overview of these debates and assesses the state of the burgeoning discipline. The contributors summarize economic sociology's accomplishments to date, identifying key theoretical problems and opportunities, and formulating strategies for future research in the field.

The book opens with an introduction to the main debates and conceptual approaches in economic sociology. Contributor Neil Fligstein suggests that the current resurgence of interest in economic sociology is due to the way it brings together many sociological subdisciplines including the study of markets, households, labor markets, stratification, networks, and culture. Other contributors examine the role of economic phenomena from a network perspective. Ron Burt, for example, demonstrates how social relationships affect competitive dynamics in the marketplace. A third set of chapters addresses the role of gender in economic sociology. In her chapter, Barbara Reskin rethinks conventional notions about discrimination and points out that the law only covers one type of discrimination, while in recent years social scientists have uncovered other forms of hidden discrimination, which must be addressed as well. The New Economic Sociology also addresses the problem of economic development and change from a sociological perspective. Alejandro Portes and Margarita Mooney elaborate on one of the key emerging concepts in economic sociology, arguing that social capital—as an attribute of communities and regions—can contribute to economic and social well-being by fostering collaboration and entrepreneurship.

The contributors concur that economic action must be interpreted through the cultural understandings that lend it stability and meaning. By rendering these often complex debates accessible, The New Economic Sociology makes a significant contribution to this still rapidly developing field, and provides a useful guide for future avenues of research.

MAURO F. GUILLÉN is associate professor of management at the Wharton School and associate professor of sociology, University of Pennsylvania.

RANDALL COLLINS is professor of sociology, University of Pennsylvania.

PAULA ENGLAND is professor of sociology, Northwestern University.

MARSHALL MEYER is professor of management and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania.

CONTRIBUTORS: James N. Baron, Denise D. Bielby, Wililam T. Bielby, Ronald S. Burt, Paul DiMaggio, Susan Eckstein, Neil Fligstein, Mark Granovetter, Michael T. Hannan, Greta Hsu, Ozgecan Kocan, Margarita Mooney, Alejandro Portes, Barbara F. Reskin, Harrison C. White, Viviana A. Zelizer.

What really happened when citizens were asked to participate in their community’s poverty programs? In this revealing new book, the authors provide an answer to this question through a systematic empirical analysis of a single public policy issue—citizen participation in the Community Action Program of the Johnson Administration’s “War on Poverty.” Beginning with a brief case study description and analysis of the politics of community action in each of America’s five largest cities—New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, and Philadelphia—the authors move on to a fascinating examination of race and authority structures in our urban life.

In a series of lively chapters, Professors Greenstone and Peterson show how the coalitions that formed around the community action question developed not out of electoral or organizational interests alone, but were strongly influenced by our conceptions of the nature of authority in America. They discuss the factors that affected the development of the action program and they note that democratic elections of low-income representatives, however much preferred by democratic reformers, were an ineffective way of representing the interests of the poor.

The book stresses the way in which both machine and reform structures affected the ability of minority groups to organize effectively and to form alliances in urban politics. It considers the wide-ranging critiques made of the Community Action Program by conservative, liberal, and radical analysts and finds that all of them fail to appreciate the significance and intensity of the racial cleavage in American politics.

J. DAVID GREENSTONE is professor and chairman of the Political Science Department at the University of Chicago.

PAUL E. PETERSON is associate professor in the Department of Political Science and Education at the University of Chicago.

Survey research was for a long time thought of primarily as a sociological tool. It is relatively recently that this research method has been adopted by other social sciences and related professional disciplines. The amount and quality of its use, however, vary considerably from field to field. This volume describes the elementary logic of survey design and analysis and provides, for each discipline, an evaluation of how survey research has been used and conceivably may be used to deal with the central problems of each field.

CHARLES Y. GLOCK is director of the Survey Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley.

Winner of the 2004 Best Book Award from the Race, Ethnicity, and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association

Perhaps no country in history has so directly and thoroughly confronted its past in an effort to shape its future as has South Africa. Working from the belief that understanding the past will help build a more peaceful and democratic future, South Africa has made a concerted, institutionalized effort to come to grips with its history of apartheid through its Truth and Reconciliation Commission. In Overcoming Apartheid, James L. Gibson provides the first systematic assessment of whether South Africa's truth and reconciliation process has been successful. Has the process allowed South Africa to let go of its painful past and move on? Or has it exacerbated racial tensions by revisiting painful human rights violations and granting amnesty to their perpetrators?

Overcoming Apartheid reports on the largest and most comprehensive study of post-apartheid attitudes in South Africa to date, involving a representative sample of all major racial, ethnic, and linguistic groups. Grounding his analysis of truth in theories of collective memory, Gibson discovers that the process has been most successful in creating a common understanding of the nature of apartheid. His analysis then demonstrates how this common understanding is helping to foster reconciliation, as defined by the acceptance of basic principles of human rights and political tolerance, rejection of racial prejudice, and acceptance of the institutions of a new political order. Gibson identifies key elements in the process—such as acknowledging shared responsibility for atrocities of the past—that are essential if reconciliation is to move forward. He concludes that without the truth and reconciliation process, the prospects for a reconciled, democratic South Africa would diminish considerably. Gibson also speculates about whether the South African experience provides any lessons for other countries around the globe trying to overcome their repressive pasts.

A groundbreaking work of social science research, Overcoming Apartheid is also a primer for utilizing innovative conceptual and methodological tools in analyzing truth processes throughout the world. It is sure to be a valuable resource for political scientists, social scientists, group relations theorists, and students of transitional justice and human rights.

JAMES L. GIBSON is Sidney W. Souers Professor of Government at Washington University, St. Louis.

A taxi driver’s life is dangerous work. Picking up a bad customer can leave the driver in a vulnerable position, and erring even once can prove fatal. To protect themselves, taxi drivers must quickly and accurately assess the trustworthiness of complete strangers. In Streetwise, Diego Gambetta and Heather Hamill take this predicament as a prototypical example of many trust decisions, where people must act on limited information and judge another person’s trustworthiness based on signs that may or may not be honest indicators of that person’s character or intent. Gambetta and Hamill analyze the behavior of cabbies in two cities where driving a taxi is especially perilous: New York City, where drivers have been the targets of frequent and violent robberies, and Belfast, Northern Ireland, a divided metropolis where drivers have been swept up in the region’s sectarian violence.

Based on in-depth ethnographic research, Streetwise lets drivers describe in their own words how they seek to determine the threat posed by each potential passenger. The drivers’ decisions about whom to trust are treated in conjunction with the “sign-management” strategies of their prospective passengers—both genuine passengers who try to persuade drivers of their trustworthiness and the villains who mimic them. As the theory that guides this research suggests, drivers look for signs that correlate closely with trustworthiness but are difficult for an impostor to mimic. A smile, a business suit, or a skullcap alone do not reassure drivers, as any criminal could easily wear them. Only if attached to other signs—a middle-aged woman, a business address, or a synagogue—are they persuasive. Drivers are adept at deciphering deceitful signals, but trickery is occasionally undetectable, so they must adopt defensive strategies to minimize their exposure to harm. In Belfast, where drivers are locals and often have histories of paramilitary involvement, “macho” posturing often serves to deter would-be criminals, while New York cabbies, mostly immigrants who view themselves as outsiders, try simply to minimize the damage from attacks by appeasing robbers and carrying only small amounts of cash.

For most people, erring in a trust decision leads to a broken heart or a few dollars lost. For cab drivers, such an error could mean losing their lives. The way drivers negotiate these high stakes offers us vivid insight into how to determine another person’s trustworthiness. Written with clarity and color, Streetwise invites the reader to ride shotgun with cabbies as they grapple with a question of relevance to us all: which signs of trustworthiness can we really trust?

DIEGO GAMBETTA is Official Fellow of Nuffield College and professor of sociology at the University of Oxford.

HEATHER HAMILL is lecturer in sociology at the University of Oxford, and a Fellow of St. Cross College.

A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust

“In this path-breaking volume, a new generation of social-identity scholars links quantitative and qualitative methods to map surprising relations among social identities and their consequences for the school pathways of low-income, immigrant, and ethnic minority youth. The authors' collaborations in the Russell Sage Working Group spark rich connections across disciplines and bring the chapters into a coherent and stimulating whole.”
—Catherine R. Cooper, professor of psychology and education, University of California, Santa Cruz 

“Building on previous work by this excellent group of scholars, Contesting Stereotypes and Creating Identities illuminates subtle pathways by which identities affect emotions, relationships, behaviors and performances in schools and other social settings. A pleasure to read!”
—Ronald F. Ferguson, faculty co-chair and director of the Achievement Gap Initiative, Harvard University

Since the end of legal segregation in schools, most research on educational inequality has focused on economic and other structural obstacles to the academic achievement of disadvantaged groups. But in Contesting Stereotypes and Creating Identities, a distinguished group of psychologists and social scientists argue that stereotypes about the academic potential of some minority groups remain a significant barrier to their achievement. This groundbreaking volume examines how low institutional and cultural expectations of minorities hinder their academic success, how these stereotypes are perpetuated, and the ways that minority students attempt to empower themselves by redefining their identities.

The contributors to Contesting Stereotypes and Creating Identities explore issues of ethnic identity and educational inequality from a broad range of disciplinary perspectives, drawing on historical analyses, social-psychological experiments, interviews, and observation. Meagan Patterson and Rebecca Bigler show that when teachers label or segregate students according to social categories (even in subtle ways), students are more likely to rank and stereotype one another, so educators must pay attention to the implicit or unintentional ways that they emphasize group differences. Many of the contributors contest John Ogbu’s theory that African Americans have developed an “oppositional culture” that devalues academic effort as a form of “acting white.” Daphna Oyserman and Daniel Brickman, in their study of black and Latino youth, find evidence that strong identification with their ethnic group is actually associated with higher academic motivation among minority youth. Yet, as Julie Garcia and Jennifer Crocker find in a study of African-American female college students, the desire to disprove negative stereotypes about race and gender can lead to anxiety, low self-esteem, and excessive, self-defeating levels of effort, which impede learning and academic success. The authors call for educational institutions to diffuse these threats to minority students’ identities by emphasizing that intelligence is a malleable rather than a fixed trait.

Contesting Stereotypes and Creating Identities reveals the many hidden ways that educational opportunities are denied to some social groups. At the same time, this probing and wide-ranging anthology provides a fresh perspective on the creative ways that these groups challenge stereotypes and attempt to participate fully in the educational system.

ANDREW J. FULIGNI is professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of California, Los Angeles, and co-director of Family Research Consortium IV. This volume was produced by the Russell Sage Foundation Working Group on Social Identity and Institutional Engagement.

CONTRIBUTORS: Joshua Aronson, Meredith Bachman, Rebecca S. Bigler, Daniel Brickman, Jennifer Crocker, William E. Cross, Jr., Carol S. Dweck, Sonia DeLuca Fernandez, Andrew J. Fuligni, Anne Galletta, Julie A. Garcia, Brian Girard, Catherine Good, Jason S. Lawrence, April Leininger, Ramaswami Mahalingam, Magdalena Martinez, Elizabeth Birr Moje, Carla O'Connor, Daphna Oyserman, Meagan M. Patterson, Marjorie Rhodes, Gwendelyn J. Rivera, and Diane N. Ruble.

Winner of the 2007 Richard A. Lester Prize for Outstanding Book in Labor Economics and Industrial Relations

"[Higher Ground] is valuable for what it tells us not only about strategies to fight poverty, but also about how to generate evidence on strategies to fight poverty."
-INDUSTRIAL & LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW

"Higher Ground describes the results from the New Hope demonstration project in Milwaukee, one of the most creative social experiments of the past twenty- five years. It tells how New Hope was designed to help participants move into jobs, retain health insurance, and find effective child care. While not all the results of the program were positive, they do show that good policies can make a difference in providing economic stability to low-income families. The les sons from New Hope, described in this book, should be part the current public discussion. This is a book that students, researchers, and policy analysts will all find useful."
-REBECCA M. BLANK, Joan and Sanford Weill Dean of Public Policy, Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan

"New Hope was an ambitious experiment in helping the poor and near-poor. Higher Ground brings out its full significance and potential, especially by showing the effects on families and children. Greg J. Duncan, Aletha C. Huston, and Thomas S. Weisner make visible what rebuilding the welfare state around employment might mean."
-LAWRENCE M. MEAD, professor of politics, New York University

"Higher Ground puts the word 'hope' back into the debate about poverty, offering compelling evidence that government can make a difference in the lives of the poor. While others sought to 'end welfare as we know it,' the architects of New Hope had a grander vision, to end poverty as we know it. New Hope restored dignity and rewarded work, and its impact extended to the next generation."
-KATHRYN EDIN, visiting professor of public policy, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University

During the 1990s, growing demands to end chronic welfare dependency culminated in the 1996 federal “welfare-to-work” reforms. But regardless of welfare reform, the United States has always been home to a large population of working poor—people who remain poor even when they work and do not receive welfare. In a concentrated effort to address the problems of the working poor, a coalition of community activists and business leaders in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, launched New Hope, an experimental program that boosted employment among the city’s poor while reducing poverty and improving children’s lives. In Higher Ground, Greg Duncan, Aletha Huston, and Thomas Weisner provide a compelling look at how New Hope can serve as a model for national anti-poverty policies.

New Hope was a social contract—not a welfare program—in which participants were required to work a minimum of thirty hours a week in order to be eligible for earnings supplements and health and child care subsidies. All participants had access to career counseling and temporary community service jobs. Drawing on evidence from surveys, public records of employment and earnings, in-depth interviews, and ethnographic observation, Higher Ground tells the story of this ambitious three-year social experiment and evaluates how participants fared relative to a control group. The results were highly encouraging. Poverty rates declined among families that participated in the program. Employment and earnings increased among participants who were not initially working full-time, relative to their counterparts in a control group. For those who had faced just one significant barrier to employment (such as a lack of access to child care or a spotty employment history), these gains lasted years after the program ended. Increased income, combined with New Hope’s subsidies for child care and health care, brought marked improvements to the well-being and development of participants’ children. Enrollment in child care centers increased, and fewer medical needs went unmet. Children performed better in school and exhibited fewer behavioral problems, and gains were particularly dramatic for boys, who are at the greatest risk for poor academic performance and behavioral disorders.

As America takes stock of the successes and shortcomings of the Clinton-era welfare reforms, the authors convincingly demonstrate why New Hope could be a model for state and national policies to assist the working poor. Evidence based and insightfully written, Higher Ground illuminates how policymakers can make work pay for families struggling to escape poverty.

GREG J. DUNCAN is the Edwina S. Tarry Professor of Education and Social Policy at Northwestern University and a faculty fellow at the Institute for Policy Research.

ALETHA C. HUSTON is the Priscilla Pond Flawn Regents Professor of Child Development in the department of human ecology at the University of Texas, Austin and associate director of the Population Research Center.

THOMAS S. WEISNER is professor of anthropology at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Immigration is often discussed in broad, statistical terms, with a focus on how it affects labor markets, schools, and social services. But at its most basic level, immigration is a process that affects people and their identities in deeply personal ways. In To Be an Immigrant, social psychologist Kay Deaux explores the role of both social conditions and individual capacities in determining how well immigrants adapt to life in their new homelands, and makes a strong case for the relevance of social psychology in immigration studies.

To Be an Immigrant looks at how immigrants are defined, shaped, and challenged by the cultural environment they encounter in their new country and offers an integrated psychological framework for studying the immigrant experience. Deaux argues that in addition to looking at macro-level factors like public policies and social conditions and micro-level issues like individual choices, immigration scholars should also study influences that occur on an intermediate level, such as interpersonal encounters. Each of these three levels of analysis is essential to understanding how immigrants adapt to a new homeland and form distinct identities. As a case study for her framework, Deaux examines West Indians, exploring their perceptions of the stereotypes they face in the United States and their feelings of connection to their new home. Though race plays a limited role in the West Indies, it becomes more relevant to migrants once they arrive in the United States, where they are primarily identified by others as black, rather than Guyanese or Jamaican. Deaux’s research adds to a growing literature in social psychology on stereotype threat, which suggests that negative stereotypes about one’s group can hinder an individual’s performance. She finds that immigrants who have been in the United States longer and identify themselves as African American suffer from the negative effects of stereotype threat more than recent immigrants.
 
More than a discrete event, immigration can be understood as a life-long process that continues to affect people well after they have migrated. To Be an Immigrant takes a novel approach to the study of immigration, looking at how societal influences help shape immigrants and their understanding of who they are.

KAY DEAUX is a Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the Graduate Center,  City University of New York.