‘Intelligent People Are More Likely to Trust Others’

Medical Xpress, March 12, 2014

Intelligent people are more likely to trust others, while those who score lower on measures of intelligence are less likely to do so, says a new study.

Oxford University researchers based their finding on an analysis of the General Social Survey, a nationally representative public opinion survey carried out in the United States every one to two years.

The authors say one explanation could be that more intelligent individuals are better at judging character and so they tend to form relationships with people who are less likely to betray them.

Another reason could be that smarter individuals are better at weighing up situations, recognising when there is a strong incentive for the other person not to meet their side of the deal.

The study, published in the journal PLOS ONE, supports previous research that analysed data on trust and intelligence from European countries. The authors say the research is significant because social trust contributes to the success of important social institutions, such as welfare systems and financial markets. In addition, research shows that individuals who trust others report better health and greater happiness.


Lead author Noah Carl, from the Department of Sociology, said: ‘Intelligence is shown to be linked with trusting others, even after taking into account factors like marital status, education and income. This finding supports what other researchers have argued, namely that being a good judge of character is a distinct part of human intelligence which evolved through natural selection. However, there are other possible interpretations of the evidence, and further research is needed to disentangle them.’



Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Eagle_Eyed

    This is good for social cohesion but also leads to conformist groupthink. White liberals’ denial of race comes to mind.

    Jared Taylor said something along the lines of “only intelligent people are smart enough to trick themselves into thinking race doesn’t exist. Almost no black person makes this mistake.” It really can’t be put any better than this.

    • DrewCali

      Denial of race?

  • JohnEngelman

    Less intelligent people have difficulty with nuance and ambivalence. They prefer thinking in terms of stereotypes, especially stereotypes that give them the excuse to look down on others.

    • WhiteGuyInJapan

      Low IQ individuals also struggle with high trust issues such as mutual self-interest and long-term gain. They probably fail the Prisoner’s Dilemma.
      Fukuyama wrote a whole book on the effects of high levels of trust in a society. The UK, the US, Germany and Japan were capable of creating more complex corporate structures, greater levels of innovation and, ultimately, higher levels of economic growth due to high trust in their respective societies.
      Conversely, low trust societies struggle to build a business beyond the family restaurant levels as they don’t trust people outside their immediate family circles.

      • M&S

        Things to keep in mind:
        1. Prisoners Dilemma is only a failure when you agree to the precondition of being a felon. Since we are talking trust as being elementary to social stability in a high function society, it is a lousy illustration of our greater dignity of racial heritage because the predicate condition is a felony evasion scheme based on early betrayal of fellow conspirators.
        2. Low IQ individuals _win_ The Prisoner’s Dilemma because they choose the benefit of themselves over others. i.e. If you both go for five or one goes free while the other does ten, someone who has less trust in their partner in crime is going to look at matters from the perspective of pull-the-trigger-first. Betrayal imposed as a hostaged choice is not a matter of self interest but of trust in another’s willingness to share pain.
        3. Small Systems are not simply a function of low social trust but simplicity and robustness in a tricky environment where risks are generally higher. Thus ‘it’s only paranoid if it isn’t true’ applies as a high risk condition which is unlikely to pan out at greater levels because there is low social earnings potential from it /on the part of other individuals/ who have to pay into the system.
        4. Whites create wonderful societies, it is true. But they also create longing to move up within those societies and fear by those who see their perfect little chunk of life being threatened by social mobility. This creates all manner of corporate instability as sellouts and walkaways and general corruption. Look at union scale wages. Look at executive salaries in a time when our industrial economy is collapsing. Look at the allowance of low skill menials in at the bottom of the economic food chain, despite the risks they pose in TFR, Crime and Social Welfare costs.
        Whites create systems which functionally depend, not on mutualism and self sacrifice but exploitation and class-conscious willingness to remain exclusive.
        This breaks up our societies as much as it builds them.
        It can easily be argued that the same thing happens in lower intelligence populations but because of their lack of organizational skills as will to believe in a dream that they do so on a local level where a family, tribal or at most regional sectarian ‘disagreement’ results in The King Is Dead conditioned outcomes. But the fact that these struggle dynamics don’t break down whole countries can be seen as a plus.
        Whites have to learn to balance need against creed and form societies which are innately stable without the influx of mass wage slaves as disabling mechanisms for the established indigenes before we can truly call ourselves ‘better’ than anyone else.
        ‘Better’ is not dependent upon what we look down upon.
        Better devises replacements for entire classes of ditch digger laborers while assuring that the -profits- from no longer supporting that high labor cost conditioned society are evenly distributed as both direct benefits (lower costs, higher wages) and added job potency or numbers throughout all classes. So that as a given wage group feels their needs increase to support a shift in wealth level, they have opportunities to make those expansions in a practical (useful to society) fashion.
        Robotics are a part of this. A very large part.
        Access to better genetics are another.
        But more than anything, whites need to have the space and the ‘trust’ to continue to create smaller and smaller (more efficient) societies so that the overhead of infrastructure doesn’t become it’s own economic sustainment issue.
        Indeed, Distributionist (jobs to the cheapest as outlier states) / Centrist (money to the middle as mercantile containment of profit from goods sold to the wealthy) economics depends on consumerism which is a bad idea for a people who are among the few who are NOT R-Breeders on this planet.
        The real Prisoner’s Dilemma is thus: if R-Breeding derives from low IQ as a strategy to create command control over limited resources and K-Breeding is a function of high IQ attempts to organize systems of exploitation of large quantities of resources with low labor populations, how do you do you break the _white_ habit of targeted allocation of wealth that simply reinforces exploitation of labor as another resource?
        Particularly when that labor also generates consumption the sum of which is penny per goods sold, an incentive to boosting numbers of consumers as laborers beyond all necessary realism of sustainable system function.
        Thus far, we have not found a way to convince high function white elites of the reality of genetics as an investment in their own people as being in their fundamental Genetic Algorithm (High IQ + K-Breeding) best interests.
        You can say Hitler and Nazism and bigotry but none of these excuses would last very long in the brains of people who were interested in the truth of things as part of a longer term strategy more than “Get richer, faster, screw everyone who comes after!”
        One simple way to achieve this would be selective immortality. Granted to those whose wealth was sufficient that they could afford half century payments of a say, half a billion dollars. Because once you are forced to live beyond the moment as a denial of your mortal coil, you have to see the future as someplace where you are most assuredly going to be present.
        And if you are the last white man living in a brown dystopia planet, that could be really unpleasant.

        • WhiteGuyInJapan

          #2: Yes, high trust societies are delicate structures and only function when the majority (let’s say 95% and up) agree to the high trust values. They are difficult to maintain and easy to destroy. Fragile eco-systems, if you will.

    • You’re clutching for a straw that isn’t in sight. Ignorant people tend to rely on stereotypes to judge and look down on other peoples. Ignorance is more to do with lack of experience, not low intelligence. Both Whites and East Asians think Blacks look the same with big, wide features, and this is based on their experience of Blacks in the west. The African continent has the largest genetic diversity in the whole world.

      • LHathaway

        “Ignorant people tend to rely on stereotypes to judge and look down on other peoples. Ignorance is more to do with lack of experience, not low intelligence”.

        Yes, but why do they rely on stereotypes to ‘judge and look down’ on other peoples? Many ignorant people are simply willfully ignorant. They take pleasure in this attitude and stance. It can become a lifelong way of dealing with the outside world.

        Thus, when IQ tests are given, they merely reveal those who have had a life long propensity toward ignorance, racism, close mindedness and violence. It is not always genetic, like you might claim. Surprise, IQ tests really do measure knowledge, and ignorance.

        • Yes, but why do they rely on stereotypes to ‘judge and look down’ on other peoples? One reason will be that they are just ignorant and don’t care for enlightenment. Another reason will be that they are scared of truth and use stereotypes to avoid admitting and/or acknowledging truth. Yet another reason will be that they are
          stubborn, anal, and think they are always right – even when they’re not. In which case, they will not be taught anything new. One more reason will be that they have an agenda, and it is convenient for them to keep the stereotypes in place.

        • M&S


          Thus, when IQ tests are given, they merely reveal those who have had a life long propensity toward ignorance, racism, close mindedness and violence.
          I would argue the opposite. People’s attitudes harden over time, why?

          Could it be that, as wisdom accrues through experience the innate ability to judge people on subconscious cues of age, expression, appearance and yes, racial group predispositions, leads them to avoid risk because they have developed an in-group base of relationships as wealth achievement on which they can more reliably depend?

          Could it also be that this hardening of attitudes from the free-wheeling nature of youth has a biological function? Weak is empathic with weakness as a common sensed level of shared social leveling as much as physical incapacitation. It is also open and respectful of others because it has no sense of it’s innate power as potential for own social leveling.

          Passing through adolescence as the mediated (not too much!) rise of some the awareness of adult responsibilities and dissimilarities in appearance vanish with the early onset of knowledge based understanding and full grown biometrics, those attitudes of easy acceptance change.

          No doubt in part due to the sense of competition with others for mate selection and approval as receptivity. We become ‘territorial’ in our relational attitudes as much as our physical bubble of influence (owned goods, privileges, etc.).

          What if that’s not the only condition of altering brain function that is occurring? What if, particularly as major increases in work-based specialization skills (not just how, but /how efficiently/ to accomplish tasks in chained combinations to achieve a given result) requires us to drop specific social-benefit event tasking and compulsory PC type attitudes as a function of _knowing what we know_?
          We know already that brains which have specialized in life long labor have highly developed neuro-motor capabilities, reflecting their enhanced ability to command muscle function over longer periods of high physical duress. These motor functions looking like long highways of highly developed synapse trees.
          But what of cognitive function which tends to look like layered nets or lattice matrices of densely interconnected function? Do they not also impose limits on specific behavioral attitudes? We make fun of geeks and nerds and yet respect engineers with similar social function but such highly evolved mental capacity that there is no doubt that they could work out the math of why our little social beliefs are non-functional /if we didn’t let them live in their own world/ as opposed to inviting challenge to ours.
          Women, who are generally agreed to be less bigoted than men have a more balanced combination of physical and high density cognitive function which is less than males of either specialization and when you get into an argument with them their native reaction is to resent your dominance over their sense of themselves, not whether you are right or wrong, capable of physically dominating them or not.
          I believe that as minds develop, they either developmentally lose immature attitudes that were part of an earlier (younger) differentiated social state. Or they become physically rejective of those functions which inhibit efficiency in learned taskings.
          I also believe that, at some level, there is still a condition of empathy going on which leftists and libtards have connected into and use, to evoke emotional reactions which are based on shame and group-hate as a generalist fear and rejection of specialist behaviors. Because generalists see high cognitive function as a drift inertia away from their own steady-state mix of submission and dominance conditioning.
          Indeed, _I_ find liberals to be the most hateful and prejudiced of all because their own brain function condition is that of the eternal child, empathic and demanding, projecting that demand as preconditional views of society as a ‘perfect mix’ when in fact what they really mean is as a perfect singularity, in line with how they are comfortable viewing it.
          And if a childlike mind with low cognitive IQ but high social manipulation skills sees the world with the eyes of the weak, looking for other weakness to justify their position as ‘safe’ (right, correct, controlling, in-power) then they are just as bigoted as any Race Realist and far more dangerous because they accrete weakness to them like a magnet sucking iron filings. Expecting the rest of society to pay for their warm-fuzzy.
          The only way you can break that attitude is to pull back from it and let it starve in the narcissistic attitudes of it’s own isolation amongst other non-functional peoples.
          Don’t assume that you know all there is about IQ as a measure of intelligence. There are many kinds and stages for mental development and at a social level what really matters is that those functional intelligences each receive enough benefit from The System that they are not cued into reactive rejection of the societal body as a whole.
          We are well past that level, both by loss of class values and by racial preferencing for minority populations. It is likely that Race Realists, who include some really smart -and- wise people thus are seeing the future of a society where they do not want to participate and are trying to put on the brakes before the environment as much as the attitudes of false racial egality ‘diversifies’ us right over the precipice of social as genetic collapse.

    • LHathaway

      I think the ‘gotch’ answer to this is that less intelligent people have untrustworthy intentions in mind and so by ‘projection’ they believe the other party is likely dishonest too.

      Like, the worse a black individual has inconvenienced or truly harmed a white person, the more they must truly believe Whites are morally deficient, bad and evil and bad? Well, I’m not sure what kind of projection that is. . maybe, some kind of ‘enabling’ I don’t know.

    • Martel

      Stereotypes tend to be true. Jews are overrepresented in certain industries, gypsies cheat and steal, blacks tend to be more physically aggressive, and so on. Historians have provided us with documentation showing consistent behavior on the part of many different ethnic groups. Kevin Macdonald has made extensive use of such historical sources to provide evidence for an alternate, less discriminatory theory of antisemitism.Byron M. Roth, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Dowling College and speaker at an American Renaissance Conference called Macdonald’s work on this subject ‘groundbreaking’. You should read it sometime, instead of stereotyping Europeans as inherently and uniquely bigoted. Ethnic conflict is much more interesting and informing when you study both participants equally, instead of holding on the unsustainable myths.

      • JohnEngelman

        Stereotypes are over generalizations of what is really true. Some Chinese are worse at mathematics than I am. Some blacks are worse at basketball, although I never met any.

        The anti Jewish stereotype is that Jews are money grubbers, and “too bright by half.” This is a backhanded compliment. It is a way of saying that Jews are intelligent and prosperous.

        • DieWulfe

          “Stereotypes are over generalizations of what is really true.”

          Stereotypes are actually true to the right of center. And, there are more possessing these characteristics than just a few. A few aren’t noticed by the public, but quite a few are.

          You are correct, not everyone fits the stereotype, but quite a few do. Those in the middle by varying degrees.

          No one can blankly say blacks are generalizations of what is not true. There are a lot on the extreme end, some in-between, and those not stereotypical on the opposite end.

        • RisingReich

          Still can’t hear you bc of that Jewish member muffling what you say. Try removing it.

          • JohnEngelman

            You just do not like to be reminded that Jews are usually intelligent and prosperous. I enjoy reminding people like you of that.

          • Jotun Hunter

            they were real prosperous in 1945

          • JohnEngelman

            Are you gloating about the Holocaust? Are you glad it happened?

            Jews quickly recovered. They formed Israel, and become prominent in every aspect of American society that requires superior intelligence.

          • Jotun Hunter

            they were sold israel – at the expense of others. Not gloating, you drama queen – but there is no more reason to ‘revere’ the holocaust than the destruction of carthage or the ‘holocausts’ of genghis khan — do you get equally weepy over the holodimor? I doubt it

          • JohnEngelman

            The Jews achieved Israel against great odds. It was not nearly as easy as “the winning of the West,” in the United States.

          • Jotun Hunter

            is that so?

        • Martel

          The first paragraph, excluding the first sentence says it all.Stereotypes tend to be quite reliable predictors of behaviour, only a fool would struggle with the notion of individuals deviating from group standards in varying degrees. We must even understand that some stereotypes are plain wrong, especially when the usage of it is driven by social taboos and political motives.

          Take your overly simplistic theory of ‘antisemitism’, in which Jews are simply the unwitting victims of Jewish lore and European gentiles are the foaming at the mouth, irrational and envious ‘antisemites’. This is contradicted by the very existence of myself, and anyone else who has been driven toward what is called ‘antisemitism’. This has been a conscious process, from many Israel supporters I know mind you, which could not have less to do with a Jew happily living of the spoils of capitalism. Good for him, I see no issues with this. Its important to scrutinize both the Jewish and the gentile factions to understand the root causes and prevent an escalation of this conflict in the future, which currently is set to happen, the normalization of less rational antisemitism on the left (pushed by Muslim immigration as well)will meet more rational antisemitism on the right. Recent research shows that only 3% of ‘antisemitic’ letters received by a range of institutions are ‘rightwing’ in origin. There are various causes for widespread ‘antisemitism’ on the left, it has little to do with your theory though.

          Resentment against Jews on the right will grow exponentially in the coming years.

          Jews would be wise to display the same capacity for selfcritique as European gentiles have done during the 19th and 20th century, they exclude themselves from historical examination as they have excluded themselves from gentile society throughout their existence in Europe.If not, then against my wishes, escalation of this conflict is inevitable.

          • JohnEngelman

            Resentment against Jews on the right will grow exponentially in the coming years.

            – Martel

            I certainly hope not. Nevertheless, that is possible if the economy continues to stagnate, and particularly if it declines significantly.

            Because Jews tend to be more prosperous than Gentiles they are vulnerable during periods of economic stress. White Gentiles who are angry about their economic circumstances, and who are looking for a target for their anger often prefer to direct that anger at Jews and non whites, rather than at rich white Gentiles.

            They feel that if they direct their anger at rich white Gentiles they acknowledge that in an increasingly competitive economy they have little of value to offer employers. By directing their anger at non whites and Jews they pose as defenders of Western civilization and the white race.

          • Martel

            I guarantee it will happen,I sympathize with Jews as I do with other peoples, including blacks and Asians of whom I have few fond memories, but accelerating this process is a must. Jewish political identity has caused major headaches for any gentiles trying to push trough nativist, anti-globalist policies. The Jews as a whole have not shown the selfcritique European gentiles have shown, and Jewish activists have struck down any initiatives to research the Jewish aspects in the Jewish versus European gentiles ethnic conflict. This has caused a major imbalance in the historical record, which to this day serves as evidence for those who wish to discriminate Europeans.

            Very few gentiles meet the caricature you present. Your theory is discriminatory and ignores the historical record. It doesn’t even explain my motivations in any degree. David Horowitz seems to be well off, I like him though he does discriminate against Europeans, even more so I like Jewish entrepreneurs who are not involved in politics in any fashion, specifically those seemingly unaware of their Jewish identity. Your theory is flawed, it was designed during the days when ‘hating whitey’ was especially trendy in American universities, and it is easy to debunk. The left is making Europe inhospitable for Jews, and many places in the US are following. The right will soon enough wake up as well.

            Its not because I hate Jews, but because I love Europeans. If Jews inducted themselves into European culture and judge themselves by the same standards as Europeans, then I will start supporting them again as I have done for years. You are one of the figures in my path who allowed me to venture into this direction, for which I thank you. The last year I was unsure what to do with the Jewish question and whether it was even worthwhile to pursue it, your inability to propose a theory which does not cast Europeans as uniquely immoral did push me in the right direction, as it it will many others, surely.

            Since black nationalists, muslim lobbyists, leftist radicals, a handful of Nazis have produced high quality propaganda against Jews, that the mainstream left has United against Israel(besides payday) and that the right soon will see the hypocrisy displayed by Jews predicts little good news. Another factor is indeed the economic downfall, which may aid in causing the necessary changes.Meanwhile, my hand will remain extended towards the Jews, no matter how harshly, how arrogantly it has been slapped down before.But their current trajectory simply is not acceptable.

          • Jotun Hunter

            you live in fairy-land

        • Jotun Hunter

          stereotypes are hurtful because they are largely true

    • Norseman

      I would only add that acting on stereotypes -provided that there is a grain of truth to them- can be quite prudent in situations where one is unable to perceive those nuances and ambivalencies.

      • JohnEngelman

        The apprehension most Americans of all races have about young black men they do not know, especially groups of young black men is reasonable.

        • Norseman

          Absolutely. Yet you can probably conceive of an unknown young black man with certain additional characteristics that would make him no more threatening than an average white person.

  • So CAL Snowman

    “Lead author Noah Carl, from the Department of Sociology, said: ‘Intelligence is shown to be linked with trusting others . . .”

    Black people inherently trust their “leaders” to lift them up and carry them to the top of the mountain or whatever and look how well that has worked out for them. More medical garbage from the medical Xpress. Personally I don’t trust very many people at all outside of my family and a couple of close friends and I NEVER trust anything a sociologist says.

    • JSS

      I don’t know how much blacks trust their “leaders”. I think they just vote for their own like every one else except brain dead Whites. I agree that this article is junk though. Blind trust is no sign of intelligence in the current world we live in. All the talk in this article of intelligent people being able to surround themselves with the right people implys discrimination not trust.

      • So CAL Snowman

        I would say that black people trust black “leaders” more than they trust White leaders and that is a huge part of the problem.

        • LovelyNordicHeidi

          Blacks trust each other more than they trust non-Blacks. They discriminate much more than Whites. We have to admit, it does give them an advantage over Whites who are the least ethnocentric group out there. But, this will change, because the ethnocentrism of Blacks will not be invisible for much longer, judging from the current trends.

          • Norseman

            “Blacks trust each other more than they trust non-Blacks”

            I do not unequivocally agree with this. It is certainly true that blacks are more tribalistic than whites. However, based on personal experience, I would add that blacks sometimes turn to whites for an impartial perspective, including on intra-black disagreements. It is if they can sense that a white person is more likely to act with integrity.

          • Jesse_from_Sweden

            Actually, they don’t.
            A study on trust showed that everyone, including blacks, were more likely to trust a white middle-aged male to things like banking and judicial matters, things that require a lot a of trust in a persons competence and ability as well as how trustworthy they are in return.

            Ironically, whites were the group who had the lowest trust for other whites (although still higher than for blacks and hispanics) and also had more trust in blacks than blacks themselves did.
            Also hispanics had very low levels of trust in blacks and vice versa.

          • LovelyNordicHeidi

            Can you tell me where I can find more information about that study? I’d be interested in reading about it.

        • JSS

          Maybe, but I think it’s more a matter of tribal loyalty and knowing that voting for a fellow congoid means more handouts for them.

          • So CAL Snowman

            Isn’t that just another way of saying that blacks trust black leaders to give them the gibs more than they trust White leaders to give them the gibs? Loyalty demands trust.

          • JSS

            I agree blacks trust their leaders to do a better job of ripping us off. On the other hand they certainly don’t trust each other on a personal level because if they did they wouldn’t always want to live around us.

      • Blacks don’t trust anybody. I’ve had a few blacks tell me they trust me over other blacks. They know black people are untrustworthy.

  • LovelyNordicHeidi

    Intelligent people are more likely to trust others, while those who score lower on measures of intelligence are less likely to do so, says a new study.
    If this is true, this will have dysgenic effects on the White population, because low-IQ Whites will be less likely to trust non-Whites. But I doubt it’s true, because despite my own IQ, about which I am not going to brag, I distrust almost everyone, seriously. So, the results of this research seem a little odd to me.

    • Sick of it

      Life experience teaches one not to be trusting.

  • David Ashton

    Nice, pleasant, “intelligent” people suppose that other people are like themselves.
    The other people know differently from experience.

  • Tarczan

    I don’t trust the authors of this report. Unless a more detailed analysis of exactly how they arrived at their conclusion is offered, I must be cynical. of the results. They just said their study shows bright people are more trusting, without any backup data.

  • The Final Solution

    I read something similar in a recent book Exodus. The author claimed that trust was essential in creating wealth and a prosperous economy, which is why Africa is a continuous failure. All of the most prosperous countries in the world are knowledge-based economies, meaning they depend more on educated, information-based workers to drive their economies rather than service or manufacturing. IQ is central to all of it. Low IQ races such as blacks are not intelligent enough to cooperate around a common goal. I believe that is what that economist found who thought he could solve all of Africa’s problems using Western ideas about economics, only to encounter that blacks simply are incapable of progressing toward any mutually beneficial goal.

    • Max

      That is not true. They can form flash-mobs to loot stores at the drop of a bag of Skittles.

    • Einsatzgrenadier

      Knowledge-based economy = outsourcing of well-paying manufacturing jobs in order to maximize corporate revenues for the top 5%. How can prosperity continue when the nation has destroyed its capacity for industrial and economic self-sufficiency, dispossessed itself of its assets and future income, leaving us with low-paying service jobs? The country is becoming less and less capable of sustaining itself and is importing much of what it needs. The US is currently running a $318 billion trade deficit with China. This large currency outflow will lead to depreciation of the dollar, raising the price of imports. What will happen when China and other countries refuse to deal with the US? How will the US survive international conflict or a cessation of imports? How is R & D possible without a manufacturing sector? Who’s going to build the prototype? The US is taking the road to nowhere.

  • MekongDelta69

    Typical weenie ‘sociologist’ tries to fudge the obvious:
    “However, there are other possible interpretations of the evidence, and further research is needed to disentangle them.”

    No Mr. Weenie Pajama Boy – There are no other ‘possible interpretations of the evidence.’

  • There are too many factors omitted from this study to place any trust in it. Intelligent people that I’ve known in academia are skeptics, which would be the opposite of trusters.

    White persons seem to be more trusting than others. That may be what the study was picking up.

    And think of the Jews with their high IQs. Jews trust no one, probably due to their focus on the holocaust.

    • So CAL Snowman

      “White persons seem to be more trusting than others. That may be what the study was picking up.”

      I think they are confusing White Pathological Altruism with trust.

      • AndrewInterrupted

        The nation-maker genes.

    • Max

      Like all of us, academics are selectively trusting and go out of their way to at least feign trust in the politically preferred groups. I DO believe that whites probably are more trusting for whatever genetic reason. Having said that, not knowing how this original study was actually done, I think that intelligent (mostly white folk) could be more successful in providing convincing answers even on cleverly designed personality tests which reflect what they believe the “correct” answers to be. You know, the upper-class of influential whites who are all for diversity so long as they don’t have to live among the results of their social meddling.

    • DieWulfe

      “Jews trust no one, probably due to their focus on the holocaust.”

      They have been the cause of holocausts of their own making before World War II. Do they think, if we did it, others can do it to us? Jews trust no one because they can’t trust themselves.

      Whites may not cause more physical harm than non-Whites, but some can be quite nasty, hateful, and cruel towards other Whites. ‘Nice to your face,’ jealous backstabbers in the workplace, taking advantage of others, and abandonment by spouses and friends, for example. I imagine jealousy and backstabbing in academia is observed as it is elsewhere; therefore, the skepticism. Intelligence has nothing to do with those behaviors. But, experience being around or involved in those behaviors, does.

  • 1stworlder

    Anyone smart would not trust people farther than they can throw them. What are the demographics around payday loan centers?

  • I am skeptical about this story.
    A person can be smart and simultaneously naïve.

    • Max

      I don’t think that this synopsis precludes naïveté on the part of the more intelligent. It only seems to indicate that they exhibit more “trust”. There’s nothing to say that they don’t suffer for it. If anything, one might conclude that they are indeed more likely naive.

  • dd121

    I guess it doesn’t always apply. I have a documented high IQ and I don’t trust those commie, marxist, white-haters at all.

  • I don’t think high IQ is all and only positive.

    High IQ people are more depressed, on average. Mental stability and emotional decline is seen highest and more rapid in the most intelligent and wealthiest nations. Major depression is a result of greater civilisation. Intelligent peoples prologue their stress response beyond their capacity to cope. Intelligent peoples are more prone to psychosis, having psychotic symptoms, suffering manic depression and inflicting emotional abuse to gain pleasure. Intelligent peoples with aggression and personal issues are more likely to have their victims emotionally destroyed and tormented, as physical violence is not even close to satisfy them – plus the fact that they can get away with it. Malice is more at home with intelligence. Its cruelty is often planned and prolonged until complete break down.

    • Sick of it

      Consider the horror that is the modern world. Maybe we’re just smart enough to realize how terrible it truly is…and it breaks us. Short-term thinkers have no idea what’s going on around them or what it means…so yeah, they live happy and carefree like a friggin Jamaican!

    • Max

      That is generally wrong. Blacks for example, are more susceptible to all forms of mental illness than are whites and this is adequately elaborated by a variety of sources. This intelligence-insanity thing is as erroneous as the “common knowledge” that high-paid executives suffer ulcers and stress more than low-income people which is contadicted by medical studies showing the opposite. The poor and blacks, both demographics of below-average IQ, suffer more stress and stress-related illnesses than the wealthy, including depression, psychosis, and autism.

      • No! They certainly are not. Whites are more prone to psychosis, having psychotic symptoms, manic depression and mania. Major depression IS a result of modern civilization. Africa is among the LEAST depressed in the world. The west has seen decline in mental stability and emotional health.

      • Garrett Brown

        I disagree. Go to a psychiatric hospital, it’s all white people.

  • DieWulfe

    I think if people aren’t likely to take advantage of or harm others, they are more likely to trust them. In other words, they say, “I’d never do that to them. It would never enter my mind.”

    These people learn through experience (I call it a form of ‘street smarts’) not to trust because others HAVE taken advantage, harmed or hurt them in some way. They see behind others’ facades having learned verbal and non-verbal clues. These experiences lead to trusting no one, not even family members, because anyone can ‘stab’ them in the back.

    Then, there’s ‘projection.’ Accusing others of what you are guilty of doing.

  • disqus_Xz3UA6obwj

    It’s because those who are lower in IQ are using their own lack of trustworthiness as their gauge to trust others.

  • Bossman

    I would say that intelligent people are more selective in whom they can trust. They may also be better at judging people.

    • Max

      They didn’t indicate that their trust was rewarded, only that they were “trusting”. These pages are replete with news articles of intelligent people who made very regrettable decisions on whom to trust.

  • Petronius

    The Oxford researchers seem to have overlooked the study showing that social trust decreases in direct ratio as racial diversity increases.

    • kikz

      i don’t necessarily agree w/the article’s premise……however, a co-factor overlooked by academia…. is economic strata, especially if the gap between the haves and have not’s is wide. economic strata is at times as clearly evident and quickly produces guarded wariness in public combined with ethnic diversity.

  • I saw some scientific study from some fancy schmancy sociologist that claimed when it comes to beliefs, 8 out of 10 people don’t care what the other 2 people believe after they find out that they were one of the 8 out of 10 people. I literally tried like forever to decipher that one and figure out what it was trying to tell me.

    • Max

      Sounds like some variety of exposition on the “herd mentality” to me. People like to believe that they are “normal” in their beliefs rather than the odd guy.

    • DieWulfe

      A person with normal healthy self-esteem doesn’t care what anyone thinks. No one establishes our self-worth except ourselves.

  • Max

    Not having read the original experimental paradigm, it may be that the same people who are more “trusting” are predominantly white who are also generally more intelligent and one does not necesarily “cause” the other. The result is rather related to a third factor -white cooperativeness. Maybe trust and intelligence are both just factors of “whiteness” but they are not likely to report that possibility. Trust of course, is frequently detrimental to the point of fatal when surrounded by non-whites as we now find ourselves.

  • Oil Can Harry

    You hit the nail on the head. High IQ people tend to live in high income areas where they can leave their car unlocked or a child’s bicycle can be left in front of the house for hours without it being stolen.

    OTOH low IQ people tend to live in low income areas where they’re constantly trying to avoid street hustlers, muggers, carjackers and other charming specimens.

  • Max

    I am not specifically challenging your claim but I would genuinely like to see some more info for what you say because this does not ring right with my recollection of such relations. The study cited here indicates that the more “trusting” people, (who are the more intelligent) report better health and greater happiness than others which result squares with every other I’ve seen (at least relative to wealth, which is in turn related to IQ generally).

    Poor people commit suicide all of the time, they just don’t make national news like a famous author or film star though blacks *are* less likely to commit suicide. I suspect that many of these cases are just an inch at a time and reported as “drug overdose”.

    • Norseman

      I have absolutely no idea if any of these claims are true.
      I just want to add that it is logically possible for there to be a correlation between trust and intelligence; a correlation between trust and happiness, while at the same there is an inverse correlation between intelligence and happiness.

  • Garrett Brown

    Whites must be pretty stupid then. We’re starting to not trust anyone.

    • DieWulfe

      There’s a lot not to trust right now.

  • DieWulfe

    That only applies to crime. There are other reasons not to trust others. When did you learn about White genocide. Had it even entered your mind? Were you not trusting before you found out that it could never occur? Did you ever think our government would allow it to happen to us?

  • John Engelman: I don’t think you do value (IQ) intelligence as much as you value the excuse it gives you push Whites down on the human ladder and call them inferior. Unfortunately, those racial realists of ours are foolishly unaware of how their facts are used against their own race by supremacist non-Whites. You are outrageous to ignore
    all of our science, research, and innovation. The societies we built that both
    Jews and NE Asians are allowed to prosper from – my I add. Hasn’t it ever crossed
    your mind that they and you need us White Gentiles in a way that we don’t need either
    of you? That is where the greater competence lies.

    I think that when this is realised, it causes a preoccupation of superiority among non-White Gentiles who use those claims of superiority to hide their underlining inferiority complex. That is why the claims are petty and pathetic – marginal IQ points, slightly
    less aggression, somewhat lower crime rate. None of it overrides the fact that
    White Gentiles have scaled the heights of human achievement and civilisation. Honestly,
    there could not be a greater way to display real superiority and demonstration.
    Why don’t you admit it for once, it is you who is jealous that neither Jews nor
    NE Asians have this under their belts?

    If you are resented on this nationalist website, then it is because of your shocking audacity more than anything else.

  • DieWulfe

    Are we born trusting or is it learned through experience? If we are brought up in a trusting environment…have trusting parents, are cared for, feel secure, do we not grow up to be trusting until we experience an environment that causes us to distrust? White children do not distrust black children.

    If we have not grown up in a trusting environment, wouldn’t we be less likely to trust others. Equally, as important, we learn from our parents. If they openly distrust others, beat their children, steal, and generally display unethical behavior, wouldn’t we learn that; therefore, we end up like them and untrustworthy. We can’t trust our parents or ourselves; therefore, we must not trust others because we think everyone is like us.

    Whites have had protected home environments compared to non-Whites; therefore, they would be more trusting because they think that is the way life is everywhere until they learn it isn’t. While intelligence plays a part, I think most of it is experience.

  • BaronBaal

    In that case I must be retarded because I have a hard time trusting people. Oh well…

  • BaronBaal

    So are domestic dogs who are trusting of people naturally more intelligent than wolves who naturally don’t trust people? Hmm…

  • gubblerchechenova

    Smart Jews trust gentiles?

    • Katherine McChesney

      They certainly do like for us to work for them. My Jewish boss in Los Angeles took me aside, encouraged me in my work, gave me instructions on what to learn and helped to further my success in the Music Business. He paid me well (approx. $5,000.00 monthly) and I was a high achieving White gentile woman in the 70’s and 80’s. The entire staff (over a 100) were gentile Whites with one black girl who worked on the switchboard.

  • Truth Teller

    I trust people based on instinct and gut feelings. The same is true of distrust. I can sense things in people.

  • SiniticMan

    It baffles me how this isn’t common sense.

    Dumb people are contemptible and are unable to cooperate because of their low trust in others which most likely is a consequence of their low intelligence. It is a good thing that they will stay poor because of their inability to cooperate with others but sadly today, these people are more likely to have more children than intelligent people.

    Trust most likely had its origins in ancient tribal warfare both before and after the neolithic age. Brothers in arms that were homogeneous and were willing to give their life for one another were more likely to survive either as groups or individuals to eventually reproduce. Those geographical, environmental, and evolutionary conditions that were most inhospitable to certain groups encouraged this process continuously and produced more evolved and intelligent races. This is what Phil Rushton was likely referring to when he mentioned “selective pressure”. The extremes of this process unfolded in Northern East Asia with the Altaic Mongoloid race. Cooperation and trust with one another was absolutely fundamental because of the threat of annihilation either from the environment, their commanders, or outside groups. The middle-ground of this process occurred with middle eastern Caucasians, Abrahamic religion and verbal culture was the uniting factor that enabled the squabbling tribes to cooperate with one another even further to survive as a group. Nordic Caucasians underwent a slightly similar process comparable with the Altaic Mongoloids (low resources/inhospitable environment) and utilized Abrahamic religion in the latter half of their history to dominate the world in a way more different and ever-lasting than the way the Mongols did. Trust is something very ancient, tribal, war-related, and racial.

  • The article talks about schizophrenia, not manic depression, mania and psychosis. Whites are much more burdened than having a schizophrenia tendency. Black Africa got off lightly in terms of mental health. There is NO rapid rate of major depression in Africa or the third world for that matter. DO YOU UNDERSTAND???

    • Max

      There are MORE black serial killers than white, by proportion. It is also well established as anyone on this website will be quick to point out, that most murders are committed by low IQ persons, as are other violent crimes. You defeat your own argument.

      And, by the way, schizophrenia is a psychosis. Depression is not.

      • Most murderers are not ‘serial’ killers. Blacks in jail are not dangerously mentally ill.

        Are you stupid?

        Serial killers are often disturbed and intelligent peoples, so you give too much credit to blacks who often aren’t intelligent enough to produce a complex serial killer.