As Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) gets integrated in design processes, building trust in these systems is critical for effective human-AI collaboration. This study introduces a framework aimed at translating the abstract concept of trust into practical strategies for design teams, focusing on four trust factors: transparency, accountability, similarity, and performance. We tested the framework’s impact on trust-building and trust learning using a mixed-methods approach, incorporating design tasks and structured workshops involving university students. The results highlight the framework’s ability to enhance participants’ understanding of trust in AI. Insights from this study contribute to advancing educational approaches for embedding trust in AI-driven design, revealing that design activities alone are not enough to impact trust learning.

European institutions are widely recognized as wielding regulatory power in a globalized market, exporting its standards across borders and between sectors. This paper asks what institutional dynamics catalyze European external regulatory impact on pharmaceutical governance in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The research focuses on two European regulatory bodies, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the European Patent Office (EPO), and explores the dynamics of their technocratic outreach beyond European borders. We find that trust is a key underlying institutional dynamic facilitating some forms of European external relations. The agencies extend their influence through technical assistance, collaboration, and work-sharing with LMIC regulators, fostering a one-sided relationship of “technocratic trust.” This trust, reinforced by international regulatory frameworks that position the EMA and EPO as “trustworthy” regulators, enables these agencies to expand their regulatory influence beyond Europe. By critically examining the impact of this trust-building on LMICs’ regulatory autonomy, this research contributes to the broader discourse on European regulatory power in global health governance and highlights potential implications for pharmaceutical markets and access in LMICs.

Extant studies on cross-border venture capital (VC) investment predominantly focus on how country-level formal institutions impact the flow of VCs across borders, but the potential role of country-level sentiments in this process has received less attention. Drawing upon the trust literature, we explore how home country political sentiment affects cross-border VC investment. Using data on Chinese VCs’ cross-border investments from 2000 to 2021, we find that home country political sentiment positively affects the amount of cross-border VC investment. Government VC (GVC) and connected VC (through sentiment transmission) positively, while investor managerial team education and investor host country experience (through sentiment suppression) negatively, moderate the influence of home country political sentiment.

The secrecy of intelligence institutions might give the impression that intelligence is an ethics-free zone, but this is not the case. In The Ethics of National Security Intelligence Institutions, Adam Henschke, Seumas Miller, Andrew Alexandra, Patrick Walsh, and Roger Bradbury examine the ways that liberal democracies have come to rely on intelligence institutions for effective decision-making and look at the best ways to limit these institutions’ power and constrain the abuses they have the potential to cause. In contrast, the value of Amy Zegart’s and Miah Hammond-Errey’s research, in their respective books, Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence and Big Data, Emerging Technologies and Intelligence: National Security Disrupted, is the access each of them provides to the thoughts and opinions of the intelligence practitioners working in these secretive institutions. What emerges is a consensus that the fundamental moral purpose of intelligence institutions should be truth telling. In other words, intelligence should be a rigorous epistemic activity that seeks to improve decision-makers’ understanding of a rapidly changing world. Moreover, a key ethical challenge for intelligence practitioners in liberal democracies is how to do their jobs effectively in a way that does not undermine public trust. Measures recommended include better oversight and accountability mechanisms, adoption of a ‘risk of transparency’ principle, and greater understanding of and respect for privacy rights.

This article argues that a relational and trust-based understanding of fides can explain its use and impact in a variety of secular and religious settings, but particularly between members of different religious communities and especially in commercial contracts. The Latin word fides can be translated in a variety of ways, from ‘faith’, ‘trust’ and ‘trustworthiness’, to ‘proof’ and ‘belief’. Within these meanings there are complex religious and legal implications. Most understandings focus on the ways in which the term defines and creates relationships within a community. Contracts from thirteenth- and fourteenth-century Barcelona and Mallorca demonstrate the meaning and significance of the use of the term between merchants and investors from different religious communities. The article provides a new understanding of the place of faith language within the creation of trusting relationships.

This article contributes to debates about the theoretical underpinning for legitimate expectations. Building on existing arguments that what underpins the doctrine is public trust in government, it draws on scholarship on trust from disciplines outside law to reimagine the “trust conception” of legitimate expectations. It argues that the current trust conception lacks conceptual clarity, including several areas of ambiguity which have generated problems for it. The article claims that with the conception so reimagined, trust can offer the necessary theoretical underpinning for legitimate expectations and thus provide much-needed certainty to this confused area of administrative law.

This paper introduces the concept of self-fulfilling testimonial injustice: a distinctive form of epistemic injustice whereby credibility deficits become true by shaping the very conditions that sustain them. Much of the literature on testimonial injustice has rightly emphasized cases in which credibility deficits are rooted in false beliefs, themselves underwritten by ethically bad affective investments. Yet such a focus risks obscuring a structurally significant variant: namely, those credibility deficits that are rendered true through self-fulfilling mechanisms. Drawing on insights from economics and psychology, I distinguish between motivated cognition-based and cognitive bias-based testimonial injustice, which together furnish the background conditions under which self-fulfilling testimonial injustice can take hold. I develop this account by drawing on both theoretical and experimental work on labor market discrimination, which illuminates the ways in which credibility deficits may become self-fulfillingly entrenched. Finally, I explore the distinctive harms of this form of injustice, focusing on its corrosive effects on epistemic self-confidence or self-trust and epistemic self-esteem, and suggest that its insidiousness and relative invisibility render it both difficult to detect and potentially more pervasive than has hitherto been acknowledged.

Citizen trust in public institutions has become a major concern for policy makers, but how institutional design affects institutional trust is not entirely clear. Existing research has mainly focused on the macro-level of welfare regimes or on the micro-level of citizens’ or frontline workers’ attributes. Our knowledge about interrelations between organisational aspects of welfare delivery and (dis)trust-formation at the meso-level of institutional design remains scarce. In the article, we investigate how users experience institutional fragmentation and how this impacts their trust in the welfare system. Based on forty-three interviews with social assistance users in Germany and Poland, we demonstrate that fragmentation is indeed relevant as an experiential context for (dis)trust-formation. However, we found that low institutional fragmentation is not, per se, trust-promoting and that higher fragmentation can be a driver for developing trust in individual caseworkers. Citizens’ perceptions of procedural justice and experienced administrative burdens are discussed as possible mediators.

Insufficient sleep’s impact on cognitive and emotional function is well-documented, but its effects on social functioning remain understudied. This research investigates the influence of depressive symptoms on the relationship between sleep deprivation (SD) and social decision-making. Forty-two young adults were randomly assigned to either the SD or sleep control (SC) group. The SD group stayed awake in the laboratory, while the SC group had a normal night’s sleep at home. During the subsequent morning, participants completed a Trust Game (TG) in which a higher monetary offer distributed by them indicated more trust toward their partners. They also completed an Ultimatum Game (UG) in which a higher acceptance rate indicated more rational decision-making. The results revealed that depressive symptoms significantly moderated the effect of SD on trust in the TG. However, there was no interaction between group and depressive symptoms found in predicting acceptance rates in the UG. This study demonstrates that individuals with higher levels of depressive symptoms display less trust after SD, highlighting the role of depressive symptoms in modulating the impact of SD on social decision-making. Future research should explore sleep-related interventions targeting the psychosocial dysfunctions of individuals with depression.

Companion friendship is a paradigm example of a trusting relationship and is a central good in human life. These friendships are also complex; navigating this complexity carries risk. Philosophical work has largely overlooked questions about how friends might navigate this morally risky space in ways that protect and develop their relationship over time. More specifically, although it is generally accepted that friendship involves acting to promote the well-being of one’s friend, ethical analysis of such interpersonal action has not addressed questions such as: How does acting for a friend’s well-being follow from and affect the trust within these relationships? What are the risks of acting for a friend’s well-being? Do genuine but unsuccessful attempts to promote a friend’s well-being, that bring about a rupture to the trust, necessarily cause lasting damage to trusting relationships? If not, why not? We argue that getting it wrong when acting for a friend’s well-being can provide an opportunity to protect and develop the trusting relationship, even while it causes harm to one’s friend and temporarily damages the relationship.