Samenvatting

Transparency is said to be paramount for citizen’s trust in (semi-)governmental organizations, such as regulators and supervisory bodies, yet there is little empirical research in this area.
In an experiment we investigated the effect of different forms of transparency on citizen trust in a Dutch financial regulator. Our measure of trust consisted of three components: Competence, Benevolence and Integrity. Two types of transparency were used (rationale transparency and process transparency) in three different scenarios, one positive for the regulator and two negative.
Transparency, and especially when focused on the ‘why’ (rationale) led to slightly more trust by citizens. This effect was most pronounced in the Competence-component of our trust-measure. Interestingly, even being transparent about negative news – i.e. admitting that mistakes were made and focusing on the ‘why’ – does not necessarily decrease trust. In contrast, negative information that focused on the ‘how’ (process transparency) yielded a negative effect on trust.
We conclude that even when the message portrays negative information about the regulator, it pays to be transparent and communicate about it. Information should focus on explaining the rationale and underlying principles of a decision, and less on how the decision was taken.