Experiences matter: A longitudinal study of individual-level sources of declining social trust in the United States.

The US has experienced a substantial decline in social trust in recent decades. Surprisingly few studies analyze whether individual-level explanations can account for this decrease. We use three-wave panel data from the General Social Survey (2006-2014) to study the effects of four possible individual-level sources of changes in social trust: job loss, social ties, income, and confidence in political institutions. Findings from fixed-effects linear regression models suggest that all but social ties matter. We then use 1973-2018 GSS data to predict trust based on observed values for unemployment, confidence in institutions, and satisfaction with income, versus an alternative counterfactual scenario in which the values of those three predictors are held constant at their mean levels in the early 1970s. Predicted values from these two scenarios differ substantially, suggesting that decreasing confidence in institutions and increasing unemployment scarring may explain about half of the observed decline in US social trust.

Open Relationship Prevalence, Characteristics, and Correlates in a Nationally Representative Sample of Canadian Adults.

Open relationships are those in which individuals agree to participate in sexual and/or emotional and romantic interactions with more than one partner. Accurate estimates of the prevalence of open relationships, based on representative, unbiased samples, are few, and there are none from outside of the United States. We present findings from a nationally representative sample of 2,003 Canadian adults, administered in 2017 via an online questionnaire. Overall, 2.4% of all participants, and 4.0% of those currently in a relationship, reported currently being in an open relationship. One-fifth of participants reported prior engagement in an open relationship, and 12% reported open as their ideal relationship type. Men, compared with women, were more likely to report prior open relationship engagement and to identify open as their ideal relationship type. Younger participants were more likely both to engage in and to prefer open relationships. Relationship satisfaction did not differ significantly between monogamous and open relationships. Having a match between one's actual relationship type and one's preferred relationship type was associated with greater relationship satisfaction. Findings suggest that, while currently only a small proportion of the population is in an open relationship, interest in open relationships is higher, particularly among younger adults, and open appears to be a viable and important relationship type.

Understanding and misunderstanding group mean centering: a commentary on Kelley et al.'s dangerous practice.

Kelley et al. argue that group-mean-centering covariates in multilevel models is dangerous, since-they claim-it generates results that are biased and misleading. We argue instead that what is dangerous is Kelley et al.'s unjustified assault on a simple statistical procedure that is enormously helpful, if not vital, in analyses of multilevel data. Kelley et al.'s arguments appear to be based on a faulty algebraic operation, and on a simplistic argument that parameter estimates from models with mean-centered covariates must be wrong merely because they are different than those from models with uncentered covariates. They also fail to explain why researchers should dispense with mean-centering when it is central to the estimation of fixed effects models-a common alternative approach to the analysis of clustered data, albeit one increasingly incorporated within a random effects framework. Group-mean-centering is, in short, no more dangerous than any other statistical procedure, and should remain a normal part of multilevel data analyses where it can be judiciously employed to good effect.

Economists, capitalists, and the making of globalization: North American free trade in comparative-historical perspective.

Why did globalization happen? Current explanations point to a variety of conditions under which states have made the free market policy changes driving international economic integration since the 1980s. Such accounts disagree, however, about the key actors involved. This article provides a reconciliation, showing how two different combinations of actors, and two different political economic pathways, have led to globalization in recent decades. In developed countries, mobilization by business has been central; elsewhere, technocrats both constrained and empowered by international finance have pursued globalization more independently of business. In both contexts, economists' technical authority has helped legitimate liberalization, despite the limited diffusion of their ideas. The article validates and elaborates this model using a comparative-historical study of how the United States, Canada, and Mexico proposed, negotiated, and ratified agreements for free trade in North America.

Does inequality erode social trust? Results from multilevel models of US states and counties.

Previous research has argued that income inequality reduces people's trust in other people, and that declining social trust in the United States in recent decades has been due to rising levels of income inequality. Using multilevel models fitted to data from the General Social Survey, this paper substantially qualifies these arguments. We show that while people are less trusting in US states with higher income inequality, this association holds only cross-sectionally, not longitudinally; since the 1970s, states experiencing larger increases in inequality have not suffered systematically larger declines in trust. For counties, there is no statistically significant relationship either cross-sectionally or longitudinally. There is therefore only limited empirical support for the argument that inequality influences generalized social trust; and the declining trust of recent decades certainly cannot be attributed to rising inequality.