Trust is a behavior, not a credential – and that explains the Rodgers-Fauci divide

Trust is not just a belief or opinion but a behavior—an action that shows vulnerability to another person’s decisions or actions. For example, trusting a doctor means following their medical advice, even if you don’t explicitly say you ‘trust’ them. Research in trust studies often defines trust this way because actions reveal real-world reliance on others. In the case of Dr. Anthony Fauci, his frequent use of the Fifth Amendment during a 2026 congressional hearing—invoking his right not to self-incriminate—may have been legally sound but did not demonstrate trust-building behaviors. Instead, it could have been perceived as evasive, reducing public trust. This contrasts with figures like Aaron Rodgers, a football player who often speaks candidly in settings designed for rapport-building, such as podcasts. The article highlights that trust behaviors are everywhere: choosing to drive involves trusting automakers, mechanics, and other drivers, while following public health advice demonstrates trust in scientists and experts.

Trustworthiness beliefs are the perceptions people hold about others that make them more likely to trust. These beliefs go beyond expertise—they include character traits like benevolence (caring about others’ well-being) and integrity (honesty and moral consistency). For instance, a scientist might show expertise but fail to demonstrate benevolence if they don’t explain how their work benefits the public. Similarly, an expert might show integrity by being transparent about study limitations but miss opportunities to communicate care for those affected by their decisions. Research breaks down trustworthiness into smaller parts, such as whether someone listens, shares information, or aligns with shared values. For example, a public health department might hold listening sessions before a new program but fail to explain why the program is important, leaving residents skeptical. Experts must address multiple aspects of trustworthiness to earn public confidence.

Trustworthiness beliefs are not universal—they depend heavily on context. What people look for in a mechanic differs from what they expect from a doctor, and the same applies to scientists and public health officials. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, people’s trust in Dr. Fauci was influenced by the specific context of pandemic policies and congressional hearings. Trust also depends on other factors beyond trustworthiness, such as whether people believe an action benefits them, if it aligns with social norms, and if they feel capable of performing the action. For instance, someone might trust Fauci’s expertise but still refuse a vaccine if they don’t believe it benefits them or fear side effects. Experts cannot assume that trust in one context will automatically transfer to another, and they must adapt their communication to the specific situation.

Experts face significant challenges in earning public trust compared to figures like influencers or athletes. These public figures often have more regular opportunities to interact with audiences, building rapport and shaping beliefs about their trustworthiness. For example, Aaron Rodgers frequently engages with fans through podcasts and social media, creating a sense of familiarity and connection. In contrast, experts like scientists or public health officials often have limited opportunities to demonstrate their benevolence, integrity, or shared values. The article notes that people may rely on misleading cues—such as how compelling someone sounds or their appearance—rather than carefully evaluating experts’ trustworthiness. This makes it harder for experts to compete with figures who have more accessible platforms and consistent engagement.