Each item is answered based on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 The trust score ranged from 42.0% to 100% with an average of 90.4%. Google Scholar, Bgue, L. (2002). Those who feel some urgency about the problem offer a variety of reasons why they think things have deteriorated. Putnam, R. D. (1995). 0000007530 00000 n Even though the factor loadings of item 2, which is negatively keyed, are lower than the loadings of the other two positively keyed items, the size of the items factor loadings is consistent with a unidimensional measurement model (see Fig. `a`xqH . WebThe series of scales was originally 39 validated by Egan and Perry (45) with an American sample. Scale Skepticism Scale Furthermore, the results of measurement invariance testing suggest metric measurement invariance of the scale, thereby implying comparability of correlations based on the latent factors across the UK and Germany. (2019). Journal of Democracy, 6, 6578. PubMedGoogle Scholar. Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 279294. Freud called his form of psychotherapy, 8. The ISEL consists of a list of 40 statements concerning the perceived availability of potential social resources. The scale consists of three dimensions of trust: ability, benevolence, and integrity. Conceptual framework for increasing legitimacy WebFemale Sexual Distress ScaleRevised (FSDS-R).46 ,50 51 We used a slightly modied scoring procedure for the SAQ so that both sexually active and inactive women could complete the questionnaire. Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. 0000001011 00000 n Nieen, D., Groskurth, K., Rammstedt, B., & Lechner, C. M. (2020a). The first true psychotherapy was developed by __________ around the turn of the century to treat cases of __________, 7. Moreover, we assessed test fairness across both states via measurement invariance tests. Likert 55 0 obj <> endobj / Interpersonal Trust Scale.Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences. interpersonal trust WebThis finding of multi-dimensionality underscores the incongruence between Rotter's definition and his measure of interpersonal trust. (2015). "a'FRre!oc*K':Ix%;=i,0 t You can demand us any scale and questionnaires related to psychology through our community,and we will provide you with a short time. Administration, Scoring and Interpretation. Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. The Interpersonal Trust Scale (ITS) measures the generalized expectancy that the word, promise, or statement of another individual or group can be relied upon. Due to alpha accumulation through multiple testing, only coefficients with a significance level above p < .001 are interpreted (this is the threshold after Bonferroni adjustmentwe use adjusted significance levels only to decide which significant correlations should be used for interpretation; Table 4 displays unadjusted p values). (2014b). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. The scope of our study was limited in several ways. Test-retest reliability studies have also found that the scale produces consistent results over time. Therefore, the reported values probably represent the lower bound of the true associations. 0000006859 00000 n Jovanovi, V. (2016). Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 10, 134148. WebCharacter-based trust is normally on an interpersonal level, where one person decides to trust another on the basis of shared social norms. As an ultra-short scale with a completion time of around 30 s, KUSIV3 It has been used in a variety of research settings to better understand how trust operates in interpersonal relationships, organizational behavior, and healthcare, among other areas. +yeYjfGhK naPF0b%*^ZJ/kJo^1KPq=o(jo qHKj)s|md D@ruS 5[fjt. The study was funded by an internal grant provided by GESISLeibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Mannheim, Germany. Would love your thoughts, please comment. ber einige Erfahrungen mit einer deutschsprachigen Skala zur Erfassung des zwischenmenschlichen Vertrauens (Interpersonal Trust) [Experiences with a German-language scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust]. Cookies policy. Koller, M. (1992). 0000008801 00000 n surgery Edwin Ghiselli identified six traits as being important for effective leadership. Trust: An integrative review from a personsituation perspective. Report Psychologie, 11, 666677. Second, an adjudication meeting was held where psychological experts, the two translators, and an expert in questionnaire translation reviewed the various translation proposals and developed the final translation. Humane treatment of the emotionally disturbed was spearheaded by __________, who personally unchained inmates at the Bictre Asylum, 2. When trust is defined independently of gullibility, as Rotter (1980) contended, then high trust is not only desirable but essential for the survival of civilization. 1980; Russell 1982). aggression 2016 Springer International Publishing AG, Evans, A. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. :xDd3qwdW\juKz*I(Q?dHuK:pM\dj#dLbm8UiC8]f*g]c=V`'u'>,>reO-)-# S6=|p+kwN?0rGPw3e,Ssv=Emz}D`vS*2{Egu/!N+o:x;1k-=2^v HWrd8oA/Q| "CYb#K\tquRB&E>Er5[N!+BUCa?D O#r{q7O:e,J'sMd.OK$r[VD6. WebScoring: Item 4 is reverse scored. 2 0 obj Sometimes these promises and tlneats are kept; other thnes they are broken. Bowling alone: Americas declining social capital. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1972.31.2.355, McDonald, R. P. (1999). Second, because we specified a tau-congeneric model, we also report McDonalds omega, as it is a more appropriate measure than Cronbachs alpha in the current context. Manage Settings For example, the German SOEP-trust scale (Naef & Schupp, 2009) includes one specific item measuring trust in strangers, rather than assessing interpersonal trust as a whole. Our empirical validation based on a heterogeneous quota sample in the UK shows that all the reliability coefficients of the English-language adaptation and its correlations with external variables are satisfactory and comparable to those of the German-language source version. 65 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<027D22DFCEB52BE71E11B2C724FCF902><858865DC9270224FB14FD3FCE2B203EF>]/Index[55 21]/Info 54 0 R/Length 67/Prev 93328/Root 56 0 R/Size 76/Type/XRef/W[1 2 1]>>stream WebWe propose input, output, and throughput legitimacy as three principles constituting good sustainability governance and propose associated open-ended criteria as a basis for developing operational standards for assessing the quality of a sustainability governance system or complex. Also with regard to the scales convergent and discriminant construct and criterion validity, we could partly support the findings of the original validation of the German-language source version (Beierlein, Kemper, et al., 2014a): For both the UK and Germany, we found the strongest correlations with optimism, life satisfaction, and the Big Five dimensions Agreeableness and Emotional Stability. ]6xL0v WBuf~F{rimm. Google Scholar. The scale presented in this article aims to meet this need. Our data yielded only a few differences between the validity coefficients of the German-language source version and the adapted English-language version (e.g., with regard to the scales correlations with external control beliefs). q3 6N|Kh"f=nXh\{mBZNb_J_Cdp K+, cq ZT% ?.9 170 undergraduates were administered the Life Experiences Survey, Interpersonal Trust Scale, and Cornell Medical Index. Some of our partners may process your data as a part of their legitimate business interest without asking for consent. Krampen, G., Viebig, J., & Walter, W. (1982). (2016) noted, in most surveys (e.g., the GSS, the WVS, and ANES) interpersonal trust is assessed using a single, fully balanced questionGenerally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people?(p. 26)accompanied by a dichotomous scale with the alternatives You cant be too careful (1) and Most people can be trusted (2). Tangible Support 2.) Google Scholar. Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). rr&2aF/>o?r(/cl%g;" -|473{|]KBjJ@/ RuK}+Kcw eb@ oVqf'+U?\DE]RSj. Dsire Nieen. 0 Scoring. Handlungstheoretische Persnlichkeitspsychologie: Konzeptuelle und empirische Beitrge zur Konstrukterhellung [Action-theory personality psychology: Conceptual and empirical contributions for the elaboration of the construct] (2nd ed.). _4EF 45.F0*cq20:gS' F6KW10t?HGe{qZ 5.VkZQMY5&b Osf8?H\CH]UMZqZ1oH+a Trust Scale: Toward Understanding Interpersonal Trust in Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 375382. Part of WebThe Specific Interpersonal Trust Scale Aamir April 21, 2023 Multidimensional Anger Inventory Aamir April 20, 2023 The Way of Life Scale Aamir April 19, 2023 The Fear of Intimacy Scale Aamir April 18, 2023 The Adult Self-Expression Scale Aamir April 17, 2023 The Friendliness Scale Aamir April 16, 2023 The Why Worry Scale Aamir April 15, 2023 To measure differences in interpersonal trust, Rotter (1967) developed an Interpersonal Trust Scale, which asked people to agree or disagree to 25 items that assessed interpersonal trust and 15 filler items designed to conceal the nature of the instrument. 1. The ITS consists Identifying careless responses in survey data. Measurement of specific interpersonal trust: Construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other. For the German-language version of KUSIV3, initial findings by Beierlein, Kemper, et al. Facet scales for Agreeableness and Conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Measuring trust: Experiments and surveys in contrast and combination (SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research No. During the past 30years, researchers have demonstrated the predictive value of political and interpersonal trust with regard to such diverse criterion variables as occupational choice, political preferences, outgroup attitudes and discrimination, and political participation and civic involvement (e.g., Wrightsman, 1991). Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness and shoplifting in high school. Anthony Evans . Abstract The aim of this study was to investigate the dimensions of Interpersonal Trust Scale using Exploratory Factor Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis in Interpersonal trust is the trust in the individuals health care provider, built through repeated interaction in which expectations of the providers trustworthiness can be tested over time (Pearson & Raeke, 2000). endobj Rotter (1980) defined interpersonal trust as "a generalized expectancy held by an individual that the word promise, oral or written statement of another individual or group can be relied on" (p. 1). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2008-99120-166&site=ehost-live. Social Science Research, 42, 347360. INTERPERSONAL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.09.008, Feng, Z., Vlachantoni, A., Liu, X., & Jones, K. (2016). Krampen, G., & Hank, P. (2004). In D. H. Rost (Ed. WebSCORING Based on the five-factor model of personality, the HPI contains seven primary scales, 42 subscales, and 206 items. To empirically examine the English-language adaptation of KUSIV3 and to investigate its comparability with the German-language source version, we analyzed psychometric criteriamore precisely, objectivity, reliability, and validation evidencein both language versions. Stimpson, T. F. D. V., & Maughan, M. R. C. (1978). Interestingly, and contrary to this, social distrust and social anxiety are positively associated with age and years of education (Krampen et al., 1982). With regard to political involvement, interpersonal trust is positively associated with political participation (Sullivan & Transue, 1999) and social (protest) participation (Benson & Rochon, 2004). Some of these items were linguistically revised. (2014a) replicate these associations. In detail, KUSIV3 proved to be slightly more reliable in Germany than in the UK (except in the case of testretest stability). 2 = mildly agree. Interpersonales Vertrauen (KUSIV3) [Interpersonal Trust (KUSIV3)]. NUK = 468; NDE = 474. 2007 - step - Predicting Job-Hopping Motive of Candidates (2012). Gttingen: Hogrefe. 0000001348 00000 n European Journal of Marketing, 44, 369381. WebResponse specifications. In the present analyses, we found small positive correlations between interpersonal trust and income (DE only) and age (UK only). Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 904930. The items from this scale come partially from Yamagishi and The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. QD3KJmoQQY_{C{B$7!Bd!Ofd`D\\`M3X.rYM9r5> 2ZW`Z^p?:,5.3w'vl//AP2U 4.eeE.8_5pNJC51TiEn4nah5])B8 0000001778 00000 n https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfv042, Massari, D. J., & Rosenblum, D. C. (1972). ), Measure of social psychological attitudes, Vol. Second, our findings reveal that the psychometric properties of the English-language adaptation of KUSIV3 are also comparable to those of the German-language source version. Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. Another example of a generalized expectancy (GE) that has provoked considerable interest and research is the concept of interpersonal trust. The surveys comprised the respective language versions of KUSIV3, alongside sociodemographic characteristics and a range of external criteria. Likert scales, levels of measurement and the laws of statistics. The utility of stylistic responding as an indicator of data fabrication in surveys. Manuscript submitted for publication. <>/ExtGState<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI] >>/MediaBox[ 0 0 612 792] /Contents 4 0 R/Group<>/Tabs/S/StructParents 0>> However, given the small number of items, we did not control for this potential method effect in our measurement model. ZIS_ScaleDetailedView - GESIS Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15, 625632. An English-language adaptation of the Interpersonal Trust Short Scale (KUSIV3). The ITS uses a Likert-type scale that comprises 25 negatively and positively poled items tapping, among other dimensions, interpersonal trust. Is the Specific Interpersonal Trust Scale a reliable and valid measure?Yes, the scale has been shown to be a reliable and valid measure of trust in a specific individual. ESS round 8 source questionnaire. All exclusion criteria were applied simultaneously, that is, any respondent who violated one or more of the three criteria was excluded from the analyses and that only those who met all three criteria were included. In addition, strong positive associations with Emotional Stability have been consistently reported (see also Evans & Revelle, 2008; Halamandaris & Power, 1997; Omodei & McLennan, 2000). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust1. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. Because our short scale is dedicated to measuring interpersonal trust in people in general (including strangers but also familiar others), we will use the term interpersonal trust in the remainder of this article to denote trust in people who are either known or unknown. Taking the sample size into account prevents biased fit indices and yields so-called robust CFI and robust RMSEA values in R/lavaan (Brosseau-Liard & Savalei, 2014; Brosseau-Liard, Savalei, & Li, 2012): metric modelrobust CFI = .996, robust RMSEA = .055; scalar modelrobust CFI = .985, robust RMSEA = .074. Despite these contrary results concerning political self-placement, the pattern of correlations suggests evidence based on scalecriterion relationships in view of the findings on life satisfaction and health. hbbd``b`@ H\ "Hp a$|>2012,``$@ ; ,tFQQ2/&Q}I.&]tt=HL* 4KiT. (2018). Participants are asked to rate their level of agreement with a series of statements related to trust in a specific individual. The ITS consists of 25 items measuring trust in specific groups (such as parents, teachers, and public officials) and trust in people in general. https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216970212006, Reeskens, T., & Hooghe, M. (2008). WebDetermined whether interpersonal trust moderates effects of life stress. (1992). Participants rated each item on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). (2015). From "very disagreement" to "very agreement" scored 1-5 points respectively. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002, Weijters, B., Baumgartner, H., & Schillewaert, N. (2013). Correspondence to Because internal consistency estimates vary across groups, testretest correlations are recommended for a comparison of the reliability of scale scores. :v w$,W! F/w#,?YZ 4s(b9l>UB'(dxG. WebScoring . Individuals who were high in optimism, life satisfaction, Agreeableness, and Emotional Stability had a tendency to have higher levels of interpersonal trust. 1 0 obj https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561011020471, Schneider, I. K., Konijn, E. A., Righetti, F., & Rusbult, C. (2011). https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155, Costa, P. T., McCrae, R., & Dye, D. A. 4 0 obj https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01454.x, Rotter, J. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540009600471, Perunovic, M. (2008). We explained our research goal (investigation of the quality of several questionnaires) to the participants. Psychology Roots is an online platform for Psychology. A. Harkness, F. van de Vijver, & P. P. Mohler (Eds. 0000006837 00000 n In his social learning theory of personality, Julian B. Rotter (1971) proposed one of the first and most systematic theoretical descriptions of interpersonal trust, which he defined as an expectation held by an individual or a group that the word, promise, verbal, or written statement of another individual or group can be relied on (p. 444). However, there is an ongoing debate on whether or not measurement equivalence can be assumed when using the interpersonal trust measures applied in large-scale social surveys, such as the ESS (see, e.g., Reeskens & Hooghe, 2008; van der Veld & Saris, 2011). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? Items 1 and 4 make up the belief that other people are basically honest factor. WebOn the Interpersonal Trust Scale, Simone most likely has a score of _____. Terms and Conditions, First, the three items of KUSIV3 were adapted to English by translating the items following the TRAPD approach (Translation, Review, Adjudication, Pretesting, and Documentation; Harkness, 2003). Each item is assigned a numerical value corresponding to the participants response, and scores are summed within each dimension and across all three dimensions to produce an overall score for the scale. WebInterpersonal Trust Scale. WebA 5-item questionnaire designed to measure an individuals general level of trust toward other people. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000481, Raykov, T. (1997). When electric shock is used to make the sight and smell of alcohol conditioned stimuli for an aversion response, the electric shock serves as the. GENERAL TRUST SCALE - The Fetzer Institute In order to investigate this type of evidence, we correlated KUSIV3 with the following constructs and criteria: (a) the Big Five dimensions Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Openness assessed with the BFI-2-XS (Rammstedt et al., 2020; Soto & John, 2017); (b) general self-efficacy assessed with GSE-3 (Doll et al., 2020)/ASKU (Beierlein, Kovaleva, et al., 2014); (c) internal and external locus of control assessed with the IE-4 (Kovaleva et al., 2014; Nieen, Groskurth, Rammstedt, et al., 2020b); (d) optimism and pessimism assessed with SOP2 (Kemper, Beierlein, Kovaleva, et al., 2014; Nieen, Groskurth, Kemper, et al., 2020); (e) general life satisfaction assessed with L-1 (Beierlein et al., 2015; Nieen, Groskurth, Rammstedt, et al., 2020a); (f) internal and external political efficacy assessed with PESS (Groskurth et al., 2020)/PEKS (Beierlein, Kemper, et al., 2014b); (g) political preferences assessed with the LeftRight Self-Placement scale (Breyer, 2015); (h) socially desirable responding assessed with the KSE-G (Kemper, Beierlein, Bensch, et al., 2014; Nieen et al., 2019); and (i) self-reported general health measured with the single-item question used in the ESS. 141164). In addition, higher interpersonal trust is associated with a higher likelihood of accepting work systems in which the supervisor has an influence on the extent of workers remuneration (Kopp & Schuler, 2003). Privacy Evans, A. M., Athenstaedt, U., & Krueger, J. I. The scale is scored on a 5-point gradation from strongly agree to strongly disagree so that strongly disagree and agree responses would mdicate trust on 12 items The Specific Interpersonal Trust Scale was developed by C. Johnson-George and W. C. Swap in 1982. Is it more desirable to score high or low on the scale, to be trustful or distrustful? (1991). Results show that Ss scoring low in trust had higher stress scores and reported more emotional and physical distress. ), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 36, 149161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397115591479, Munir, Y., Khan, S.-U.-R., Sadiq, M., Ali, I., Hamdan, Y., & Munir, E. (2016). By using this website, you agree to our The full mark is 18126 points.The higher the score, the greater the trust in interpersonalinteraction. (2019). statement and To examine evidence based on the relationship between scores on KUSIV3 and scores on (a) the Big Five dimensions of personality, (b) general self-efficacy, (c) locus of control, (d) optimismpessimism, (e) life satisfaction, (f) political efficacy, (g) political preferences, (h) socially desirable responding, and (i) health, respectively, the following short scale measures were also administered as part of the survey: The extra-short form of the Big Five Inventory2 (BFI-2-XS; English version: Soto & John, 2017; German version: Rammstedt, Danner, Soto, & John, 2020), The General Self-Efficacy Short Scale3 (GSE-3; Doll, Nieen, Schmidt, Rammstedt, & Lechner, 2020; German version: Allgemeine Selbstwirksamkeit Kurzskala; ASKU; Beierlein, Kovaleva, Kemper, & Rammstedt, 2014), The InternalExternal Locus of Control Short Scale4 (IE-4; Nieen, Groskurth, Rammstedt, & Lechner, 2020b; German version: Internale-Externale-Kontrollberzeugung4; Kovaleva, Beierlein, Kemper, & Rammstedt, 2014), The OptimismPessimism Short Scale2 (SOP2; Nieen, Groskurth, Kemper, Rammstedt, & Lechner, 2020; German version: Skala Optimismus-Pessimismus2; Kemper, Beierlein, Kovaleva, & Rammstedt, 2014), The General Life Satisfaction Short Scale (L-1; Nieen, Groskurth, Rammstedt, & Lechner, 2020a; German version: Kurzskala zur Erfassung der Allgemeinen Lebenszufriedenheit; Beierlein, Kovaleva, Lszl, Kemper, & Rammstedt, 2015), The Political Efficacy Short Scale (PESS; Groskurth, Nieen, Rammstedt, & Lechner, 2020; German version: Political Efficacy Kurzskala; PEKS; Beierlein, Kemper, Kovaleva, & Rammstedt, 2014b), The political LeftRight Self-Placement scale (English and German version: Breyer, 2015), The Social DesirabilityGamma Short Scale (KSE-G; Nieen, Partsch, Kemper, & Rammstedt, 2019; German version: Kurzskala Soziale ErwnschtheitGamma; Kemper, Beierlein, Bensch, Kovaleva, & Rammstedt, 2014), The single-item question used in the ESS to measure self-reported general health(ESS, 2016). British Journal of Medical and Statistical Psychology, 72, 426446. For example, strongly disagree might be assigned a value of 1, while strongly agree might be assigned a value of 5. Entwicklung einer Skala zur Erfassung dreier Aspekte von sozialem Vertrauen [Development of a scale to assess three aspects of social trust]. %%EOF Results Exploratory Factor Analyses https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315, Rose, N., Wagner, W., Mayer, A., & Nagengast, B. The Soweto Stress Scale, used in Phase 1 and previously developed by Mpondo et al. Doll, E., Nieen, D., Schmidt, I., Rammstedt, B., & Lechner, C. M. (2020). https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2007.106.116, Chen, F. F. (2007). RITS is also marginally affected by case and order of risk tolerance For both the UK and Germany, quota samples were drawn that represented the heterogeneity of the adult population with regard to age, gender, and educational attainment. Cross-cultural measurement equivalence of generalized trust. Two professional translators (English native speakers) translated the instruction, the item wordings, and the response scale labels independently of each other into British English and American English, respectively. In the first step, we analyzed the descriptive statistics and reference ranges separately for both versions of KUSIV3. (2005). 0000001485 00000 n ;(W> dwt400e ) EI is the ability to sense, understand, manage, and apply information toward leadership, motivation, and influence. A review of three decades of doctoral studies using the principal instructional management rating scale: A lens on methodological progress in educational leadership. ), The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (pp. We suggest that individual answers should be aggregated to the scale level only if there are no missing values on any of the three itemsa recommendation that is followed in the present study, also with respect to other constructs used for the validation. In an institution for delinquent adolescents, a behavioral system has been implemented in which the adolescents earn points for target behaviors like getting up on time, making beds, attending class, etc. Klner Zeitschrift fr Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 47, 294320. WebThe average inter-item correlations werer= 0.28 for trust items andr= 0.22 for trustworthiness.Trust and trustworthiness scores were weakly associated with gender and age. endstream endobj startxref In line with Rotter (1967, 1971), there was a small positive association with socially desirable responding in both samples, but only for the exaggerating positive qualities subscale, which depicts the self-deceptive enhancement component of communion-induced socially desirable responding (Nieen et al., 2019). Public Opinion Quarterly, 80, 2643. First, our samples were restricted to participants in a web-based survey (CASI). Interpersonal trust between patient and Items are answered using a five-point rating scale ranging from do not agree at all (1), over hardly agree (2), somewhat agree (3), and mostly agree (4) to completely agree (5). (1951). % trust Cross-Cultural Research, 49, 393421. Paris: OECD Publishing. 0000007508 00000 n Interpersonal Trust Scale (TS) The TS is a self-reporting tool for those with close relationships to measure their interpersonal trust. The Interpersonal Trust Short Scalethe English-language adaptation of the Kurzskala Interpersonelles Vertrauen (KUSIV3)measures interpersonal trust as a psychological disposition with just three items (completion time ~30s). Reversed item bias: An integrative model. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000151, Liu, J., Rau, P.-L. P., & Wendler, N. (2015). Interpersonal Political Efficacy Kurzskala (PEKS) [Political Efficacy Short Scale (PEKS)]. Interpersonal Trust Scale Hb```f``=vAX,'10 Internale-Externale-Kontrollberzeugung4 (IE-4) [InternalExternal Locus of Control4 (IE-4)]. Hence, there is an unmet need for a conceptually coherent, valid, reliable, and cross-culturally equivalentyet short and broadly applicablemeasure of interpersonal trust. Keep visitingPsychology Roots. In sum, the results of the present study show for the first time the utility of the English-language adaptation of KUSIV3 and the comparability of its psychometric properties with those of the German-language source version.