Ethnicity and Trust: A Multifactorial Experiment
| Date | 01 August 2015 |
| Author | Luis Miller,Henar Criado,Paloma Ubeda,Francisco Herreros |
| Published date | 01 August 2015 |
| DOI | 10.1111/1467-9248.12168 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Ethnicity and Trust: A Multifactorial Experiment
Henar Criado
Complutense University of Madrid
Francisco Herreros
Spanish National Research Council
(IPP-CSIC)
Luis Miller
University of the Basque Country
Paloma Ubeda
University of the Basque Country
This article reports the results of an online experiment conducted in two ethnically fragmented societies in Spain: the
Basque Country and Catalonia. It tests the effect of co-ethnicity on trust and reciprocity. Ethnicity was manipulated
in the experimental context using three ethnic attributes: ancestors’ origin, language and name. Additionally, the
article reports a comparison of general levels of trust in the two regions. No co-ethnicity effect on trust is found, but
there is significantly more reciprocal behaviour between Catalan speakers in Catalonia. Higher levels of trust and
reciprocity are found in the more homogeneous society of the Basque Country. The lack of co-ethnicity effect on
trust is especially significant given that the Basque Country has experienced decades of terrorism along ethnic lines.
Keywords: ethnicity; trust; experimental research
There is an ongoing debate in the social sciences about the effects of ethnicity on
cooperation and trust. According to some authors, ethnic heterogeneity leads to lower
levels of societal trust because people tend to confine their trust to their co-ethnics (Alesina
and La Ferrara, 2002; Costa and Kahn, 2003; Delhey and Newton, 2005; Knack and
Keefer, 1997). Stereotyping, a taste for discrimination and the prevalence of social norms
against free-riders within cultural groups are the preferred mechanisms to explain this
pattern of in-group trust. Nevertheless, there are studies that fail to find these negative
effects of ethnic diversity on social capital and the provision of public goods in society
(Gesthuizen et al., 2009; Hooghe et al., 2009).
This article provides a new empirical test of the co-ethnicity effect on trust. The main
contribution lies in laboratory-type experiments conducted in natural settings: the ethni-
cally fragmented Spanish regions of the Basque Country and Catalonia. Spain has been,
historically, an ethnically fragmented society. From the end of the nineteenth century, this
ethnic fragmentation has led to a territorial cleavage where Basque and Catalan identities
are opposed against a homogenous Spanish identity. The recent bid for independence in
Catalonia is an example of the saliency of the ethno-nationalist cleavage in contemporary
Spanish politics. As ethnic differences have been clearly politicised in Spain, these two
regions are a promising site to analyse the existence of a co-ethnicity effect on trust.
A second contribution of the article resides in the test of multiple ethnic attributes that
might be salient in the political debate. The first region we study, the Basque Country, is
a rich, highly egalitarian and culturally homogeneous society in which geographical origin
– being a ‘true Basque’ – is the most prominent feature in the identity debate. The second
region is Catalonia, also rich but culturally less homogeneous. In this more heterogeneous
society, origin is not as prominent in the political debate and the central identity feature is
bs_bs_banner
doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12168
POLITICAL STUDIES: 2015 VOL 63(S1), 131–152
© 2014 The Authors. Political Studies © 2014 Political Studies Association
language, which has become the main mechanism for newcomers to integrate into Catalan
society.
Theory
The growing literature on the role of ethnic differences in the development of trust
generally assumes that increased diversity is associated with lower social capital and
interpersonal trust or, in other words, that immigration and ethnic diversity challenge
community cohesion (Alesina and La Ferrara, 2002; Costa and Kahn, 2003; Delhey and
Newton, 2005; Knack and Keefer, 1997). One possible mechanism linking ethnic het-
erogeneity and trust is that people tend to confine their trust to co-ethnics. Distrust
between ethnic groups could be based on cultural stereotypes (Gambetta and Hamill,
2005), a taste for discrimination – i.e. the willingness to discriminate against people even
at a personal loss – or on more rational mechanisms such as the difficulty to enforce trust
outside the subgroup boundaries, as the ties between subgroups may not be sufficiently
dense to sustain enforceable trust (Frank and Yasumoto, 1998, p. 673).
Most survey evidence seems to confirm the co-ethnicity effect on trust. Using data both
comparative and from the US, Costa and Kahn (2003) conclude that social capital,
measured as volunteering, membership of associations and trust, is lower in heterogeneous
communities in terms of income, race and ethnicity. Rice and Steele (2001) find that
ethnic diversity across counties in Iowa is associated with lower levels of community
attachment and citizens that view their towns with greater suspicion. In a comparative
analysis of 60 countries from the World Value Survey, Delhey and Newton (2005)
conclude that ethnic fractionalisation is negatively associated with social trust, which is a
result that to a large extent confirms previous comparative analyses – e.g. that of Alesina
and La Ferrara (2000) among American states or Knack and Keefer’s (1997) analysis of
social capital and economic performance in 29 countries. These lower levels of social
capital and trust seem to be related to distrust among different ethnic groups. As Delhey and
Newton (2005, p. 312) put it, ‘the greater the dissimilarity of other people, the more
suspicion and distrust’. However, not all studies based on survey data agree that ethnic
heterogeneity reduces social trust. This association is not confirmed, for example, in
Hooghe et al. (2009) and Gesthuizen et al. (2009) with data from European countries.
Experimental evidence shows mixed results regarding the effect of co-ethnicity on trust
and cooperation. Fershtman and Gneezy (2001) find evidence of out-group discrimination
between Ashkenazik Jews and Eastern Jews in a trust game carried out in Israel. Eastern
Jews are considered more untrustworthy by both the Ashkenziks and the Eastern Jews
themselves. The mechanism they find to explain this pattern is stereotyping rather than a
taste for discrimination. In a third-party punishment game with two tribes in Papua New
Guinea, Bernhard et al. (2006) find that altruistic punishment (i.e. punishment of free-
riders carried out even at a personal cost and when there is no reputation in play) is clearly
determined by group patterns; punishment is greater when the recipient and the punisher
belong to the same group. Habyarimana et al. (2007; 2009) also find consistent co-ethnic
cooperation in their laboratory experiments in field settings in Uganda. They test the
influence of several mechanisms – preferences, technology and strategy selection – in
explaining why people tend to be more cooperative towards co-ethnics. After rejecting
132 HENAR CRIADO, FRANCISCO HERREROS, LUIS MILLER AND PALOMA UBEDA
© 2014 The Authors. Political Studies © 2014 Political Studies Association
POLITICAL STUDIES: 2015, 63(S1)
To continue reading
Request your trial