Generalized trust and all-cause mortality: A population-based prospective cohort study.

Area of Science:

• Social Science
• Public Health
• Epidemiology

Background:

• Social science literature indicates that excessive trust can be detrimental, while moderate trust may be more beneficial in social interactions.
• Generalized trust, or the belief in the trustworthiness of others, is a key concept in social capital research.
• Previous research has not fully explored the nuanced relationship between varying levels of generalized trust and health outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the association between different levels of generalized trust and all-cause mortality.
• To utilize a detailed, four-alternative trust item to capture nuances in generalized trust.
• To determine if moderate trust is a health-protective factor against mortality.

Main Methods:

• A prospective cohort study design was employed.
• Data from 28,198 respondents of the 2008 Public Health Survey in Scania, Sweden, were analyzed.
• Multiple Cox regression analyses were performed, linking survey data to all-cause mortality records over a 9.3-year follow-up period.

Main Results:

• All-cause mortality was significantly lower in the 'Agree' (moderate trust) category compared to the 'Completely agree' (very high trust) reference group.
• No significant differences in all-cause mortality were observed between the very high trust group and the low or very low trust categories.
• Dichotomizing trust into high versus low revealed significantly higher all-cause mortality only when controlling for sex and age.

Conclusions:

• The interpretation and construction of generalized trust measures require careful consideration.
• Moderate generalized trust should be further investigated as a potential health-protective factor.
• Public health strategies may benefit from understanding the role of nuanced trust levels in population health.