用户对福利国家的信任:以挪威为例

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q3 SOCIAL WORK
Hans-Tore Hansen
{"title":"用户对福利国家的信任:以挪威为例","authors":"Hans-Tore Hansen","doi":"10.1111/ijsw.70014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examined user trust in Nav among groups receiving various benefits and assistance from Nav. Based on institutional theory and research, the central hypothesis is that those users who have been allocated selective benefits involving discretionary judgments, especially social assistance, will have less trust in Nav than other users. In addition, users who are satisfied with the service they have received from their supervisors will report higher levels of trust toward Nav than other users. The empirical basis for the study is Nav's annual user surveys (2008–2023). The two hypotheses were supported, but the main differences are between social assistance and other groups. Furthermore, the condition for granting benefits explained less of the variation in trust than the interaction users have with Nav. The study argues that institutional factors matter for trust in the welfare state and that a holistic view of users' life situations should be used to understand their trust toward the welfare state.</p>","PeriodicalId":47567,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Welfare","volume":"34 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trust in the welfare state among users: The case of Norway\",\"authors\":\"Hans-Tore Hansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ijsw.70014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study examined user trust in Nav among groups receiving various benefits and assistance from Nav. Based on institutional theory and research, the central hypothesis is that those users who have been allocated selective benefits involving discretionary judgments, especially social assistance, will have less trust in Nav than other users. In addition, users who are satisfied with the service they have received from their supervisors will report higher levels of trust toward Nav than other users. The empirical basis for the study is Nav's annual user surveys (2008–2023). The two hypotheses were supported, but the main differences are between social assistance and other groups. Furthermore, the condition for granting benefits explained less of the variation in trust than the interaction users have with Nav. The study argues that institutional factors matter for trust in the welfare state and that a holistic view of users' life situations should be used to understand their trust toward the welfare state.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47567,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Social Welfare\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Social Welfare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijsw.70014\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijsw.70014","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了从Nav获得各种好处和帮助的群体对Nav的用户信任。在制度理论和研究的基础上,中心假设是那些被分配了涉及自由裁量判断的选择性利益的用户,特别是社会援助,将比其他用户更少地信任导航。此外,对上司提供的服务感到满意的用户对Nav的信任度高于其他用户。本研究的实证基础是Nav的年度用户调查(2008-2023)。这两种假设得到了支持,但主要区别在于社会救助和其他群体之间。此外,与用户与Nav的交互相比,给予利益的条件对信任变化的解释更少。该研究认为,制度因素对福利国家的信任很重要,应该用用户生活状况的整体观点来理解他们对福利国家的信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trust in the welfare state among users: The case of Norway

This study examined user trust in Nav among groups receiving various benefits and assistance from Nav. Based on institutional theory and research, the central hypothesis is that those users who have been allocated selective benefits involving discretionary judgments, especially social assistance, will have less trust in Nav than other users. In addition, users who are satisfied with the service they have received from their supervisors will report higher levels of trust toward Nav than other users. The empirical basis for the study is Nav's annual user surveys (2008–2023). The two hypotheses were supported, but the main differences are between social assistance and other groups. Furthermore, the condition for granting benefits explained less of the variation in trust than the interaction users have with Nav. The study argues that institutional factors matter for trust in the welfare state and that a holistic view of users' life situations should be used to understand their trust toward the welfare state.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
10.50%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Social Welfare publishes original articles in English on social welfare and social work. Its interdisciplinary approach and comparative perspective promote examination of the most pressing social welfare issues of the day by researchers from the various branches of the applied social sciences. The journal seeks to disseminate knowledge and to encourage debate about these issues and their regional and global implications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信