CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 420Communication and COVID-19 ImpactRisk Perception and ManagementPublic Relations and Crisis Communication

The Role of Public Trust During Pandemics: Implications for Crisis Communication

Siegrist, Michael, Zingg, Alexandra·2014·European Psychologist
DOI 10.1027/1016-9040/a000169
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The present review examined the importance of trust when preparing for and during a pandemic. The reviewed literature suggests that trust in health agencies positively influenced people’s willingness to adopt recommended behavior. Most of these studies are atheoretical, and due to the lack of a common framework for trust and its antecedents, finding commonalities among the studies may seem difficult. The trust, confidence, and cooperation model was used to uncover the commonalities among the various studies on trust. This framework suggests that a distinction between values and past performance may be helpful to better understand the impact of trust on risk perception and behavior. Based on the reviewed literature, the following five recommendations relevant for crisis communication during pandemics were identified: A diverse set of experts should be used as communicators, medical personnel need to model the recommended behavior, a transparent information strategy should be used, the focus should be not only on trust but also on confidence, and establishing trust in health authorities before a pandemic occurs is important. Furthermore, research gaps were identified that should be addressed to better understand the role of trust when dealing with pandemics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1027/1016-9040/a000169

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lessons learned from previous infectious disease outbreaks and public health emergencies, including HIV, H1N1, SARS, MERS and Ebola, indicate that trusted sources of information and guidance are fundamental to disease control.

    “Lessons learned from previous infectious disease outbreaks and public health emergencies, including HIV, H1N1, SARS, MERS and Ebola, remind us that trusted sources of information and guidance are fundamental to disease control16.”

    From A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine (2021) · cites this paper as [16]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Siegrist, M., & Zingg, A.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
ORCID
Venue
European Psychologist
Publisher
Hogrefe Publishing Group
Published
2014-01-01
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
23-32
ISSN
  • 1016-9040 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-531X
DOI
10.1027/1016-9040/a000169
OpenAlex
W1936179315
Cited by
420
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 51 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 89 · 2021: 95 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
European Psychologist (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
Keywords
public trust, pandemic, crisis communication, health authorities, risk perception, health behavior adoption, expert communication, transparency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review