Measuring Laypeople's Trust in Experts in a Digital Age: The Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI): Three Datasets.

Educational Psychology

Authors(s) / Creator(s)

Hendriks, Friederike
Kienhues, Dorothee
Bromme, Rainer

Abstract

Given their lack of background knowledge, laypeople require expert help when dealing with scientific information. To decide whose help is dependable, laypeople must judge an expert's epistemic trustworthiness in terms of competence, adherence to scientific standards, and good intentions. Online, this may be difficult due to the often limited and sometimes unreliable source information available. To measure laypeople's evaluations of experts (encountered online), we constructed an inventory to assess epistemic trustworthiness on the dimensions expertise, integrity, and benevolence. Exploratory (n = 237) and confirmatory factor analyses (n = 345) showed that the Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI) is composed of these three factors. A subsequent experimental study (n = 137) showed that all three dimensions of the METI are sensitive to variation in source characteristics. We propose using this inventory to measure assignments of epistemic trustworthiness, that is, all judgments laypeople make when deciding whether to place epistemic trust in - and defer to - an expert in order to solve a scientific informational problem that is beyond their understanding.

Persistent Identifier

https://doi.org/10.5160/psychdata.hsfe15mu08

Year of Publication

2015

Funding

German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Research Training Group 1712 “Trust and Communication in a Digitized World”

Citation

Hendriks, F. ., Kienhues, D. & Bromme, R. (2015). Measuring Laypeople's Trust in Experts in a Digital Age: The Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI): Three Datasets. (Version 1.0.0) [Data and Documentation]. Trier: Research Data Center at ZPID. https://doi.org/10.5160/psychdata.hsfe15mu08

Study Description

Research Questions/Hypotheses:

Epistemic trustworthiness can be differentiated in the three dimensions expertise, integrity and benevolence.
These dimensions are separable, though to some extent correlated.

Research Design:

Research Instrument; repeated measurements

Measurement Instruments/Apparatus:

Study 1: Participants received 18 semantic opposites to rate a scientific expert on Likert scales ranging from 1 (e.g. professional) to 7 (e.g., unprofessional).
Exploratory factor analysis revealed three factors – “expertise”, “integrity” and “benevolence” – explaining 61.66% of the total variance.

Study 2: The constructed Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI) was reduced to 16 items. To test the three-factor structure of the inventory, a new data set was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis. The results confirmed the three-factor structure.
After elimination of two items, the final version of the METI consists of 14 items. All three factors are related to the comprehensive theoretical construct “epistemic trustworthiness”.

Study 3: The final version of the METI consisting of 14 items was administered in an experimental study. Participants had to rate the epistemic thrustworthiness of six ficticious persons, who were indicated as potential authors of a blog entry. The blog entry was about a study from the field of neurology. Descriptions of authors varied along each of the dimensions of epistemic trustworthiness (low vs. high expertise, low vs. high integrity, low vs. high benevolence). The results indicated that the METI is able to measure epistemic trustworthiness in a differentiated way.
For detailed information see Hendriks, Kienhues & Bromme (2015).

Data Collection Method:

Data collection in the absence of an experimenter

Online-Survey

Population:

Young German graduates

Survey Time Period:

Study 1: August & Septembre 2013
Study 2: January, February & March 2014
Study 3: July & August 2015

Sample:

Convenience Sample

Gender Distribution:

Study 1:
75,5% female subjects
24,5% male subjects

Study 2:
69,3% female subjects
30,7% male subjects

Study 3:
75,2% female subjects
24,8% male subjects

Age Distribution: Study 1: 19-47 years; Study 2: 18-50 years; Study 3: 19-53 years

Spatial Coverage (Country/Region/City): Germany

Subject Recruitment:

Study 1: Participants registered in the Bromme research unit’s internal volunteer database were contacted via e-mail containing the link to the online survey. Participants could choose the time and location of their participation. Subjects took part in an Amazon voucher lottery worth a total of 200 euro.

Study 2: Participants were recruited in lectures at the University of Muenster. Students interested in participation could leave their email adress for contact. They were contacted via e-mail containing the link to the online survey. Participants could choose the time and location of their participation. Subjects took part in an Amazon voucher lottery worth a total of 200 euro.

Study 3: Participants registered in the Bromme research unit’s internal volunteer database were contacted via email containing the link to the online survey. Furthermore, advertisements were posted in a newsletter for students at the University of Muenster and on the German magazine “Psychologie Heute”’s website. Participants could choose the time and location of their participation. Subjects took part in an Amazon voucher lottery worth a total of 100 euro.

Sample Size:

Study 1: 237 individuals; Study 2: 345 individuals; Study 3: 137 individuals

Return/Drop Out:

Study 1: 300 persons followed the link to open the online survey. Only those who completed the survey were included in the analysis (79%).
Study 2: 406 persons followed the link to open the online survey. Only those who completed the survey were included in the analysis (85%).
Study 3: 243 persons followed the link to open the online survey. Only those who completed the survey were included in the analysis (56%).

hsfe15mu08_readme.txt

Text file - 3 KB