In psychological research, it has long been established that people trust in strangers’ morality (Is this person "good") far more often than one might expect. Time and again, studies have shown that we give others a leap of faith that goes well beyond our actual expectations of their trustworthiness. This phenomenon seems to follow a norm: It appears that we often trust to avoid the uncomfortable situation of openly questioning someone else. In this context, trust is an act of respect and politeness.
But does this leap of faith also apply when it comes to the abilities of others? In their study, DSS researchers Detlef Fetchenhauer and Thomas Graczyk, together with David Dunning, Daniel Ehlebracht, and Thomas Schlösser, investigated the foundations of interpersonal trust in either morality or competence. To do so, the researchers developed the "Competence Game," in which participants wager money on whether their partner can pass a specific test (e.g., an intelligence test).
The results of the study series reveal intriguing psychological patterns: given the same expectations, people trust others’ morality significantly more than their competence. Interestingly, however, we are more willing to take a risk in the Competence Game if the other person’s reward depends directly on that decision. Yet, this behavior seems to stem less from a desire to avoid questioning the other person’s abilities and more from an intention to give them an opportunity to profit.
These findings show that we do not receive an automatic "pass" when it comes to our abilities. This means: If you want others to rely on your skills, you cannot hope that they will be as politely assumed as your honesty. Competence must be communicated and proven to create a basis for cooperation.
