“It’s a Battle You Can’t Win”: Domination and Class Differences in Real-World Trust among Black Families
中文摘要
阶层如何影响一个人的信任倾向？既有研究发现，在人际与制度情境中，地位较高的行动者比地位较低的行动者表现出更低的信任。学者们将这一发现解释为结构性依赖的结果——即当人们获取有价值资源的替代手段很少时。相比之下，我发现依赖不足以解释我在黑人家庭中所观察到的阶层与制度信任之间的关系，这些家庭的孩子在一个富裕的、以白人为主的学区被建议接受特殊教育及其他补偿性项目安置。基于一项社区民族志的回顾性访谈，研究结果表明，现实世界中的信任决策过程也涉及支配。关于信任的实证研究忽视了受托方——即被给予信任的一方——如何运用权力以在信任交换中获得顺从，以及信任方——即信任他人的一方——如何运用其权力以抵御受托方的影响。我认为，信任最好被概念化为一个由两部分组成的决策过程，因为阶层及其他地位资源在两个关键节点上影响信任方选择的自由：(1) 在权衡信任错误的选项与成本时；(2) 在面对面的互动中表达不信任时，此时支配的潜在可能性很高。本研究聚焦于真实信任交换中相互交织的权力体系，表明中产阶层黑人信任方如何运用符号资源“对抗”教育专家的制度性权力并拒绝安置，而工人阶级信任方则同意安置。
Abstract
How does class affect one’s propensity to trust? Previous research finds higher-status actors express less trust than lower-status actors in interpersonal and institutional contexts. Scholars explain this finding as an outcome of structural dependence—when people have few alternative means for accessing valuable resources. In contrast, I find dependence inadequate to explain the relationship I observe between class and institutional trust among black families whose children were recommended for special education and other remedial program placement in an affluent, predominantly white school district. Drawing on retrospective interviews from a community ethnography, findings show that real-world trust decision processes also involve domination. Empirical studies of trust have overlooked the ways trustees—those being given trust—exercise power to achieve deference in trust exchanges, and how trustors—those placing trust in others—deploy their power to withstand trustees’ influence. I argue that trust might best be conceptualized as a two-part decision process, because class and other status resources affect trustors’ freedom to choose at two key junctures: (1) in weighing options and costs of trust errors, and (2) in communicating distrust in face-to-face interactions, where the potential for domination is high. Focusing on intersecting systems of power in authentic trust exchanges, this study shows how middle-class black trustors use symbolic resources to “go up against” the institutional power of educational experts and refuse placement, whereas working-class trustors consent to placement.