New research suggests that people instinctively place more trust in those who come from modest backgrounds — not because of what they have, but because of where they started.
Key Points at a Glance
- People are more likely to trust individuals from lower-income childhoods
- Trust was higher when low socioeconomic status was part of someone’s past
- Trust decisions were influenced more by perceived morality than wealth
- Behavioral trust and belief-based trust don’t always align
- Study opens new questions about class perception and social dynamics
Trust is the invisible currency of relationships, businesses, and communities. But what makes us decide to trust someone? According to a new study published by the American Psychological Association in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, the answer may have less to do with present status and more with someone’s past — especially their childhood socioeconomic background.
Led by Kristin Laurin, PhD, of the University of British Columbia, researchers conducted a series of experiments with more than 1,900 participants to examine how social class — both past and present — influences trust. The findings are as intriguing as they are timely: people are significantly more likely to place their trust in individuals who grew up with less.
The study used a behavioral approach to measure trust, asking participants to engage in a “trust game” with fictional profiles. These profiles detailed either modest or affluent backgrounds — some described individuals who attended public schools and worked part-time jobs, while others portrayed people who went to private schools and took European vacations. Participants were then asked to “invest” raffle tickets with one of these fictional players, knowing that the tickets would triple in value and the other player could choose how much, if any, to return.
It turns out that participants not only gave more tickets to players with humble backgrounds — signaling higher behavioral trust — but also believed those players would be more generous in return. The perceived morality of someone’s background played a major role: people consistently rated those who grew up in less privileged conditions as more moral and trustworthy.
Interestingly, when the profiles described individuals who were currently lower class, participants still showed behavioral trust — giving them more tickets — but didn’t necessarily believe those individuals would reciprocate. In other words, people trusted based on past hardship, not just current circumstances.
This psychological split between what we do and what we expect is at the heart of the study. “Our findings show a clear distinction between childhood and current class in shaping trust,” said Laurin. “People believe that growing up in modest circumstances builds character, even if the person is no longer in that situation.”
This insight has practical implications for everything from hiring decisions to team dynamics, to how we present ourselves in social and professional environments. For those who come from affluence, it may be strategically advantageous to emphasize present relatability over past privilege. Conversely, those with humble beginnings might find that transparency about their background builds credibility and rapport.
However, Laurin is careful to note that the study didn’t measure whether people from lower-income backgrounds are objectively more trustworthy. That question remains open for future research. “We were looking at perception, not actual behavior,” she said. “But perception shapes real-world decisions, and that’s important.”
The results challenge assumptions that affluence automatically earns respect or trust. Instead, they highlight how narratives of resilience and adversity continue to resonate — sometimes more powerfully than wealth or success.
This research also invites deeper reflection on how we navigate social class dynamics in everyday life. Trust, it seems, doesn’t merely follow the money. It follows the story — especially stories of struggle, survival, and strength.
