Value importance and value congruence as determinants of trust in health policy actors

The paper examines levels and determinants of trust in a health care system and in key actors in the health policy community. Talcott Parsons theorizes that the sharing of common values is a necessary condition for interpersonal trust to exist; this paper tests that notion at the level of systemic (institutional) trust. The paper reports findings of a 1999 survey of 493 randomly selected residents of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. It uses multiple regression analysis to identify the determinants of three different types of trust—generalized systemic trust, fiduciary trust, and generalized trust in particular actors’ input to health system changes. Among the numerous independent variables, special attention is devoted to the degree of congruence or incongruence between the importance which respondents attach to one of the values enunciated in the Canada Health Act—namely, ‘accessibility’ (equal access to quality health care)—and the importance which respondents believe is attached to that value by the Regional Health Authority and by the Premier of the province. Both value importance and value congruence on equal accessibility are found to be important factors explaining variation in all three types of trust. In explaining levels of trust in the Premier on the issue of health care system reform, congruence on equal accessibility proved to be even more important than such factors as political partisanship, political cynicism, and personal experience as a patient in the health care system. Findings also suggest that there is an emotional component to systemic trust.