4.6 Article

Trust in the safety of tourist destinations: Hard to gain, easy to lose? New insights on the asymmetry principle

Journal

RISK ANALYSIS
Volume 28, Issue 4, Pages 843-853

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01077.x

Keywords

asymmetry principle; negativity bias; tourism risks; trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

According to the asymmetry principle of trust, negative events decrease trust to a much higher extent than positive events increase trust. The study at hand intended to verify whether this notion of asymmetry holds true with respect to trust in the safety of tourist destinations. Thus, in contrast to previous research that analyzed trust asymmetry in the context of involuntary technological risks, the present study evaluates the validity of the asymmetry principle of trust in the context of voluntary tourism risks. The hypothesis that negative or risky information on destination safety (absence of proper safety measures and conditions) has a higher impact on distrust than, conversely, positive or nonrisk information on destination safety (provision of proper safety measures and conditions) has on trust was tested in an online survey (N = 640). In contrast to the asymmetry pattern found by Slovic (1993), results of the current work suggest symmetry rather than asymmetry of trust. The presence of proper safety measures and conditions (positive or nonrisk information) was found to have at least the same-and in some cases an even higher-impact on trust than the absence of such measures and conditions (negative or risky information) had on distrust. Findings provide empirical evidence for the thesis that the prevalence of trust asymmetry is dependent on the risk source and demonstrate that trust is symmetric rather than asymmetric in the context of voluntary tourism risks. Furthermore, results imply an influence of positive versus negative expectations as well as of prior trusting relationships on the occurrence of the asymmetry principle.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available