Noncognitive accounts of trust reduce it to a one-part relation without expectations

Evidence

At their extremes, these views hold that trust is a one-part relation: A trusts (or has a trusting attitude), although they may include a restriction, “with respect to X.” Moreover, they generally reject any role for expectations because expectations are very much a matter of knowledge. — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 343

In the case of the accounts of trust as not knowledge, however, even the three-part relational structure of trust and the nearly universal view that it in some way involves expectations are challenged. — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 343

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the structural difference between relational (three-part) trust and noncognitive one-part trust — a precise conceptual distinction relevant to Luhmann’s framework.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 343