Using quantitative analysis of questionnaire responses, observations during focus group discussions, and qualitative assessment of discussion statements, the present study examined trust and social representations of the U.S. Forest Service’s management of Southern California national forests for the protection of endangered species. Supporting expectations based on the salient values similarity (SVS) model, it was found that (a) trust was highly correlated to assessments of shared salient values, and (b) trust and both the evaluation and acceptance of specific forest management practices were strongly related. Four patterns of social representations of shared value saliency and trust of U.S. Forest Service forest management to protect species were identified. Results demonstrate the importance of trust to the acceptance of forest management practices. They also suggest the need to recognize the influence of perceived variations in saliency of values in the SVS model.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Asquith, J.L. (1990). The effects of group size and composition on the outcome of focus group sessions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Claremont Graduate School.
2.
Associated Press. (2000, July 4). Revolt against federal control digs in. Bellingham Herald, p. A9.
3.
Baldassare, M. (2000). California in the new millennium: The changing social and political landscape. Berkeley: University of California Press.
4.
Baron-Cohen, S. (1999). The evolution of a theory of mind. In M.C. Corballis & S.E.G. Lea (Eds.), The descent of mind: Psychological perspectives on hominid evolution (pp. 261-277). New York: Oxford University Press.
5.
Bergman, M.M. (1998). Social representations as the mother of all behavioral pre-dispositions? Notes on the relations between social representations, attitudes and values. Papers on Social Representation, 7, 77-83.
6.
Clayton, S. (2000). Models of justice in the environmental debate. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 459-474.
7.
Cook, P.J., & Cable, T.T. (1996). Attitudes toward state-level threatened and endangered species protection in Kansas. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1(4), 1-13.
8.
Cvetkovich, G.T., & Lofstedt, R.E. (Eds.). (1999). Social trust and the management of risk. London: Earthscan.
9.
Cvetkovich, G., & Winter, P.L. (1998). Community reactions to water quality problems in the Colville National Forest: Final report. Bellingham, WA: Western Institute for Social Research, Department of Psychology.
10.
Cvetkovich, G., & Winter, P.L. (2001). Social trust and the management of threatened and endangered species: An investigation of communities of interest and place. Bellingham: Western Washington University.
11.
Cvetkovich, G.T., Winter, P., & Earle, T.C. (1995, August). Everybody is talking about it: Public participation in forest management. Paper presented to the American Psychological Association, New York.
12.
Czech, B., Krausman, P.R., & Borkhataria, R. (1998). Social construction, political power, and the allocation of benefits to endangered species. Conservation Biology, 12, 1103-1112.
13.
Damasio, A. (1994). Descarte’s error. New York: Grouset/Putnam.
14.
Decker, D.J., & Enck, J.W. (1996). Human dimensions of wildlife management: Knowledge for agency survival in the 21st century. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1(2), 60-71.
15.
Du Bois, S. (2000, May 23). Conservation group sues over grizzlies. Retrieved 2001, from http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/home/
16.
Dunlap, R.E. (2000). The environmental movement at 30. The Polling Report, 16(8), 1, 6-8.
17.
Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.G., & Jones, R.E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: The revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
18.
Earle, T.C., & Cvetkovich, G.T. (1995). Social trust: Towards a cosmopolitan society. New York: Praeger.
Earle, T.C., & Cvetkovich, G. (1999). Social trust and culture in risk management. In G. Cvetkovich & R.E. Lofstedt (Eds.), Social trust and the management of risk (pp. 9-21). London: Earthscan.
21.
Earle, T.C., Siegrist, M., & Gutscher, H. (2000). Trust and confidence: A dual-mode model of cooperation. Bellingham: Western Washington University.
22.
Ekstrand, E.R., & Loomis, J. (1998). Incorporating respondent uncertainty when estimating willingness to pay for protecting critical habitat for threatened and endangered fish. Water Resources Research, 34, 3149-3155.
Frith, C.D., & Frith, U. (2000b). The physiological basis of theory of mind. In S. Baron-Cohen, H. Tager-Flusberg, & D. Cohen (Eds.), Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental neuroscience (pp. 335-356). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
25.
Frith, U., & Frith, C. (2001). The biological basis of social interaction. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(5), 151-155.
26.
Fukuyama, F. (1996). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.
27.
Galli, J.M., & Penkala, J.M. (1981). Attitudes toward endangered species protection and funding. Proceedings of the 38th Northeast Fish and Wildlife Conference, 38, 113-119.
28.
Gauvin, M. (1998). Culture, development, in theory of mind: Comment on Lillard. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 37-42.
29.
Glass, R.J., More, T.A., & Stevens, T.H. (1990). Public attitudes, politics and extramarket values for reintroduced wildlife: Examples from New England. Transactions of the 55th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 55, 548-557.
30.
Hammond, K.R. (1996). Human judgment and social policy: Irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavoidable injustice. New York: Oxford University Press.
31.
Herek, G.M., & Glunt, E.K. (1993). Public attitudes toward AIDS-related issues in the United States. In J.B. Pryor & G.D. Reeder (Eds.), The social psychology of HIV infection (pp. 229-261). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32.
Hudson, A. (1999, December 29). Task force to probe threats to foresters. The Washington Times, p. A4.
33.
Kasperson, R., Golding, D., & Kasperson, J.X.R. (1999). Trust and democratic theory. In G.T. Cvetkovich & R.E. Lofstedt (Eds.), Social trust and the management of risk (pp. 22-41). London: Earthscan.
34.
Kellert, S.R. (1980). Americans’ attitudes and knowledge of animals. Transactions of the 45th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 45, 11-23.
35.
Kellert, S.R. (1985). Social and perceptual factors in endangered species management. Journal of Wildlife Management, 49, 528-536.
36.
Kellert, S.R. (1993). Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conservation Biology, 7, 845-855.
37.
Kempton, W., & Boster, J. (1995). Environmental values in American culture. San Diego: Academic Press.
38.
Krausman, P.R., Shaw, W.W., Etchberger, R.C., & Harris, L.R. (1995). The decline of bighorn sheep in the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona. In L.F. DeBano, P.F. Folliott, A. Ortega-Rubio, G.J. Gottfried, R.H. Hamre, & C.B. Edminster (Eds.), Biodiversity and management of the Madrean Archipelago: The Sky Islands of southwestern United States and northwestern Mexico (pp. 245-250). Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
39.
Leuschner, W.A., Ritchie, V.P., & Stauffer, D.F. (1989). Opinions on wildlife: Responses of resource mangers and wildlife users in the southeastern United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 17, 24-29.
40.
Loomis, J.B., & Giraud, K. (1997). Economic benefits of threatened and endangered fish and wildlife species: Literature review and case study of values for preventing extinction of fish species. First progress report. Fort Collins: Department of Agriculture and Resources Economics, Colorado State University.
41.
Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power: Two works by Niklas Luhmann. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
42.
McAllister, B. (2001, June 15). Conservation groups wary of forest-policy plan Retrieved 2001, from http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0%2C1413%2C36%257E11%257E%2C00.html?
Morgan, M.G., Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., & Atman, C.J. (2001). Risk communication: A mental models approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45.
Moscovici, S. (1973). Foreword. In C. Herzlich (Ed.), Health and illness: A social psychological analysis (pp. viii-xiv). San Diego: Academic Press.
46.
Moscovici, S. (1988). Notes towards a description of social representation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 211-250.
47.
Nahan, G.P. (1997). Cultures of habitat: On nature, culture, and story. Washington, DC: Counterpoint.
48.
Ochsner, K.N., & Lieberman, M.D. (2001). The emergence of social cognitive neuroscience. American Psychologist, 56, 717-734.
49.
Opotow, S. (1994). Predicting protection: Scope of justice and the natural world. Journal of Social Issues, 50(3), 49-63.
50.
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
51.
Petts, J. (1998). Trust and waste management information expectation versus observation. Journal of Risk Research, 1, 307-320.
52.
Peyton, R.B., & Langenau, E.E. (1985). A comparison of attitudes held by BLM biologists and the general public towards animals. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 13, 117-120.
53.
Pfleger, K. (2001). Forest service mulls policy change. Retrieved June 14, 2001, from http://www.ap.org/
54.
Phillips, M.L., Boyle, K.J., & Clark, A.G. (1998). A comparison of opinions of wildlife managers and the public on endangered species. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 26, 605-613.
55.
Pianin, E. (2001, July 7). Administration revisits forestland rules: Paper industry, Western governors want protective regulation scaled back. The Washington Post, p. A2.
56.
Putman, R.D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. Political Science and Politics, 27, 664-683.
57.
Schoenecker, K.A., & Shaw, W.W. (1997). Attitudes toward a proposed reintroduction of Mexican gray wolves in Arizona. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2(3), 42-55.
58.
Siegrist, M. (1999). A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 2093-2106.
59.
Siegrist, M. (2000). The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 20, 195-203.
60.
Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G. (2000). Perception of hazards: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 20, 713-720.
61.
Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G., & Roth, C. (2000). Salient values similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 20, 353-362.
62.
Sjöberg, L. (1998). Risk perception: Experts and the public. European Psychologist, 3, 1-12.
63.
Sjöberg, L. (2001). The limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Analysis, 21, 188-198.
64.
Slovic, P. (1999). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. In G.T. Cvetkovich & R.E. Lofstedt (Eds.), Social trust and the management of risk (pp. 42-52). London: Earthscan.
65.
Smith, E.R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131.
66.
Stern, P. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 407-424.
67.
Stern, P., & Dietz, T. (1994). The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 65-84.
68.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2001). Endangered Species Act. Retrieved October 4, 2001, from http://endangered.fws.gov/esa.html
69.
Wiedemann, P.M., & Femers, S. (1993). Public participation in waste management decision making: Analysis and management of conflicts. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 33, 355-368.
70.
Winter, P.L., Palucki, L.J., & Burkhardt, R.L. (1999). Anticipated responses to a fee program: The key is trust. Journal of Leisure Research, 31, 207-226.
71.
Wolff, B., Knodel, J., & Sittitrai, W. (1993). Focus groups and surveys as complementary research methods. In D.L. Morgan (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 118-136). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
72.
Yamagishi, T., Cook, K.S., & Watabe, M. (1998). Uncertainty, trust, and commitment formation in the United States and Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 104, 165-194.
73.
Yamagishi, T., Kikuchi, M., & Kosugi, M. (1999). Trust, gullibility, and social intelligence. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 145-161.
