BMF Collaborative Project 3: Influence of generalized trust on life satisfaction across different social contexts
AISDL
August 7, 2022
Highlight:
• The AISDL team invites portal users to participate in a research project exploring the relationships between generalized trust on life satisfaction
• The research project will have five authors.
• The registration period opens from August 7 to 28, 2022, and will close sooner if the maximum number of participants is reached.
More details of collaborative projects are available here: https://mindsponge.info/posts/39
1. Project description
1.1. Background
Generalized trust (social trust) is the trust one has toward other members of society. Studies have suggested a positive correlation between social trust and life satisfaction [1,2,3]. Mental health distress was found to be associated with low life satisfaction and low social trust [4]. Due to such findings, recommendations on policymaking have been leaning toward increasing social trust. However, the information processing mechanism underlying this relationship has not been explored deeply.
1.2. Project objectives
This project aims to validate the findings on the relationship between social trust and life satisfaction, as well as explore deeper into the psychological pathways behind the relationship. Here, it is worth noting that the using the mindsponge approach [5], we can examine the role of trust across different social contexts, which can provide new insights into the aforementioned relationship.
1.3. Materials and Methods
The research project will employ a dataset of 1237 urban adults in Cali, Colombia [6]. This dataset was used in a former related study [4].
The research project will follow the Bayesian Mindsponge Framework (BMF) [7]. For more information on BMF analytics, portal users can refer to the following book [8]. The bayesvl R package will be employed for statistical analyses [9].
1.4. Main findings
Figure 1 presents the mindsponge-based constructed model’s coefficient distributions on an interval plot.
Figure 1. The constructed model’s coefficient distributions
The results can be interpreted as follows:
In a model with life satisfaction as the outcome, when considering education and socioeconomic factors, generalized trust is negatively associated with life satisfaction; However, both education level and socioeconomic status moderate the above effect in the opposite direction. For example, specific situations are as follows: in people with high education levels, higher social trust more likely means higher life satisfaction; for those with low education levels, higher social trust more likely means lower life satisfaction.
2. Collaboration Details
2.1. Current Collaboration Stage: Registration stage
2.2. Registration Period: August 7, 2022 – August 28, 2022
2.3. Registration Guidelines
Portal users should follow these steps for registering to participate in this research project:
2.4. Number of Participants
This project has five participants. The registered participants will be selected based on the ‘first come-first serve’ rule. Early Career Researchers (ECRs) and those from low-resource countries will be prioritized in specific cases.
2.5. AISDL Mentor
- First author (project leader)
References
[1] Mikucka M, Sarracino F, Dubrow JK. (2017). When Does Economic Growth Improve Life Satisfaction? Multilevel Analysis of the Roles of Social Trust and Income Inequality in 46 Countries, 1981–2012. World Development, 93, 447–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.01.002
[2] Habibov N, Afandi E. (2015). Pre- and Post-crisis Life-Satisfaction and Social Trust in Transitional Countries: An Initial Assessment. Social Indicators Research, 121(2), 503–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0640-8
[3] Zanin L. (2017). Education and Life Satisfaction in Relation to the Probability of Social Trust: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Analysis. Social Indicators Research, 132(2), 925–947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1322-5
[4] Martínez LM, Estrada D, Prada SI. (2019). Mental health, interpersonal trust and subjective well-being in a high violence context. SSM - Population Health, 8, 100423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100423
[5] Vuong QH, Napier NK. (2015). Acculturation and global mindsponge: An emerging market perspective. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 49, 354–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.06.003
[6] Martínez L. (2019). Trust, life satisfaction and health: Population data in mid-size city in the Global South. Data in Brief, 27, 104639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2019.104639
[7] Nguyen MH, La VP, Le TT, Vuong QH. (2022). Introduction to Bayesian Mindsponge Framework analytics: An innovative method for social and psychological research. MethodsX, 9, 101808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2022.101808
[8] Vuong QH, Nguyen MH, La VP. (2022). The mindsponge and BMF analytics for innovative thinking in social sciences and humanities. De Gruyter.
[9] La VP, Vuong QH. (2019). bayesvl: Visually Learning the Graphical Structure of Bayesian Networks and Performing MCMC with ‘Stan’. The Comprehensive R Archive Network. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/bayesvl/index.html
August 7, 2022
Highlight:
• The AISDL team invites portal users to participate in a research project exploring the relationships between generalized trust on life satisfaction
• The research project will have five authors.
• The registration period opens from August 7 to 28, 2022, and will close sooner if the maximum number of participants is reached.
More details of collaborative projects are available here: https://mindsponge.info/posts/39
1. Project description
1.1. Background
Generalized trust (social trust) is the trust one has toward other members of society. Studies have suggested a positive correlation between social trust and life satisfaction [1,2,3]. Mental health distress was found to be associated with low life satisfaction and low social trust [4]. Due to such findings, recommendations on policymaking have been leaning toward increasing social trust. However, the information processing mechanism underlying this relationship has not been explored deeply.
1.2. Project objectives
This project aims to validate the findings on the relationship between social trust and life satisfaction, as well as explore deeper into the psychological pathways behind the relationship. Here, it is worth noting that the using the mindsponge approach [5], we can examine the role of trust across different social contexts, which can provide new insights into the aforementioned relationship.
1.3. Materials and Methods
The research project will employ a dataset of 1237 urban adults in Cali, Colombia [6]. This dataset was used in a former related study [4].
The research project will follow the Bayesian Mindsponge Framework (BMF) [7]. For more information on BMF analytics, portal users can refer to the following book [8]. The bayesvl R package will be employed for statistical analyses [9].
1.4. Main findings
Figure 1 presents the mindsponge-based constructed model’s coefficient distributions on an interval plot.
Figure 1. The constructed model’s coefficient distributions
The results can be interpreted as follows:
In a model with life satisfaction as the outcome, when considering education and socioeconomic factors, generalized trust is negatively associated with life satisfaction; However, both education level and socioeconomic status moderate the above effect in the opposite direction. For example, specific situations are as follows: in people with high education levels, higher social trust more likely means higher life satisfaction; for those with low education levels, higher social trust more likely means lower life satisfaction.
2. Collaboration Details
2.1. Current Collaboration Stage: Registration stage
2.2. Registration Period: August 7, 2022 – August 28, 2022
2.3. Registration Guidelines
Portal users should follow these steps for registering to participate in this research project:
- Create an account on the website (preferably using an institution email)
- Read carefully and select the author order that you want to become. Each project consists of a certain number of authors, and each author order in the manuscript corresponds to specific tasks of which the participant will be in charge.
- Comment your desired author order and your current affiliation in the collaborative project post.
- Patiently wait for the formal agreement on the project from the AISDL mentor.
2.4. Number of Participants
This project has five participants. The registered participants will be selected based on the ‘first come-first serve’ rule. Early Career Researchers (ECRs) and those from low-resource countries will be prioritized in specific cases.
2.5. AISDL Mentor
- Name: Tam-Tri Le
- Affiliation: Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research, Phenikaa University, Vietnam
- Contacting email: aisdl_team@mindsponge.info
- First author (project leader)
- Name:
- Affiliation:
- Roles: being responsible for finalizing the project (mandatory), being responsive throughout the project (mandatory), conceptualizing, organizing the manuscript, assigning tasks, keeping track, supporting and guiding other participants, and editing the manuscript.
- Name:
- Affiliation:
- Registering/invited time:
- Roles: conducting a literature review, discussing results, writing the manuscript (Introduction and Discussion), and revising the manuscript during the peer-review process.
- Name:
- Affiliation:
- Registering/invited time:
- Roles: describing methods and materials, writing the manuscript (Methods and Materials), and revising the manuscript during the peer-review process.
- Name:
- Affiliation:
- Registering/invited time:
- Roles: conducting a literature review, writing the manuscript (Introduction), and revising the manuscript during the peer-review process.
- Name:
- Affiliation:
- Registering/invited time:
- Roles: being responsive throughout the project (mandatory), validating the manuscript, discussing results, writing the manuscript (Results and Discussion), submitting the manuscript, revising the manuscript during the peer-review process, and responding to reviewers’ comments.
References
[1] Mikucka M, Sarracino F, Dubrow JK. (2017). When Does Economic Growth Improve Life Satisfaction? Multilevel Analysis of the Roles of Social Trust and Income Inequality in 46 Countries, 1981–2012. World Development, 93, 447–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.01.002
[2] Habibov N, Afandi E. (2015). Pre- and Post-crisis Life-Satisfaction and Social Trust in Transitional Countries: An Initial Assessment. Social Indicators Research, 121(2), 503–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0640-8
[3] Zanin L. (2017). Education and Life Satisfaction in Relation to the Probability of Social Trust: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Analysis. Social Indicators Research, 132(2), 925–947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1322-5
[4] Martínez LM, Estrada D, Prada SI. (2019). Mental health, interpersonal trust and subjective well-being in a high violence context. SSM - Population Health, 8, 100423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100423
[5] Vuong QH, Napier NK. (2015). Acculturation and global mindsponge: An emerging market perspective. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 49, 354–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.06.003
[6] Martínez L. (2019). Trust, life satisfaction and health: Population data in mid-size city in the Global South. Data in Brief, 27, 104639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2019.104639
[7] Nguyen MH, La VP, Le TT, Vuong QH. (2022). Introduction to Bayesian Mindsponge Framework analytics: An innovative method for social and psychological research. MethodsX, 9, 101808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2022.101808
[8] Vuong QH, Nguyen MH, La VP. (2022). The mindsponge and BMF analytics for innovative thinking in social sciences and humanities. De Gruyter.
[9] La VP, Vuong QH. (2019). bayesvl: Visually Learning the Graphical Structure of Bayesian Networks and Performing MCMC with ‘Stan’. The Comprehensive R Archive Network. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/bayesvl/index.html
tags:
trustlife satisfaction