Trust is domain-specific, varying by context and relationship rather than globally.

Evidence

Admittedly, trust and distrust are, in the way in which complexity is reduced, confused in principle and oriented towards concrete persons or groups or the objects and events symbolizing their trustworthiness. That does not mean, however, that trust relationships cannot be restricted to specific aspects. One can trust someone in matters of love but not in money matters; one can trust his knowledge but not his skill, his moral intention but not his ability to report objectively, his taste but not his discretion. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 320 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Iterated ongoing relationships are the largest source of trust in ordinary life.; Trust is a plastic concept that requires narrow specification to be useful; Trust relationships can be restricted to specific domains of competence — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 320 (+14 more)

Related

• Trust is a plastic concept that requires narrow specification to be useful (similarity 0.92)
• Trust relationships can be restricted to specific domains of competence (similarity 0.90)
• Widespread trust consists of pockets of dyadic relationships, not generalized sentiment (similarity 0.87)
• Trust is domain-specific and shifts with the trusted person’s incentives. (similarity 0.86)
• Survey items on generalized trust necessarily restrict the range of trustable matters (similarity 0.85)
• Grounded trust cannot be selectively aimed without criteria for selection (similarity 0.85)
• Generalized trust means trust toward strangers beyond one’s known circle. (similarity 0.85)
• Trust is an over-flexible concept that demands precise definition. (similarity 0.84)
• Trust is confidence expressing faith in others’ probity or in abstract principles. (similarity 0.84)
• Individual-level rational-choice accounts of trust fail as general explanations (similarity 0.84)
• Fine-grained discrimination of whom to trust limits the role of noncognitive trust. (similarity 0.83)
• Primary emotional attachments ground trust that later extends far beyond them (similarity 0.83)
• Generalized trust is noncognitive and nonrelational by definition (similarity 0.83)
• Generalized trust is closer to expectation than to relationship-specific trust (similarity 0.83)
• Differences in trust are epistemological, not psychological or irrational. (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Trust relationships can be restricted to specific domains of competence #corroborates (0.95) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 320
• Widespread trust consists of pockets of dyadic relationships, not generalized sentiment #corroborates (0.90)
• Trust is stratified by a code of differential rules, not generalized across all matters #corroborates (0.90)
• Trust grows out of the specific relationship between the parties #corroborates (0.85)
• Generalized trust is closer to expectation than to relationship-specific trust #corroborates (0.80)
• Trust presupposes a structured environment supplied by the existence of other systems. #expands (0.75)
• Trust in trust takes several structurally distinct forms #qualifies (0.75)
• Fine-grained discrimination of whom to trust limits the role of noncognitive trust. #expands (0.75)
• Trust and distrust can increase together within differentiated systems. #expands (0.75) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 313
• Pre-modern trust is anchored in local place rather than abstract systems. #exemplifies (0.75) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 245
• Trust solves problems of risk but operates only within a familiar world #qualifies (0.72) — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 1334