Embedded Files
The main objective of the TRUEDEM work package 8 is to deliver new empirical evidence to verify or refute the project’s research hypotheses concerning the specific context in which people make decisions about trustworthiness, individual and institutional characteristics considered as the main indicators of trustworthiness, and individual and country-level factors that influence trust-building. To fulfil this objective, WP8 consists of four components (or tasks), each corresponding to a specific study distinguished based on the data collection method on one hand and the target group on the other. Component 1 deals with the design and implementation of an online quantitative survey of citizens in a number European countries; component 2 concerns organization of a series focus groups with citizens in 6 European countries; component 3 includes organization of a series of 10-20 expert and elite qualitative interviews with politicians and policymakers in 10 European countries; finally, component 4 deals with the organization of a series of 10-20 consultations with the civil society organizations using the method of qualitative interview in 10 countries.
WP Leader: Dr. Kseniya Kizilova, ICSR, Austria.
WORK PLAN AND DELIVERABLES
Task 8.1. Online survey.
In June-July 2025, the TRUEDEM project conducted a cross-national online survey on political trust and democratic attitudes in 24 EU member states. The countries included were Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden. In each country, around 1,200 respondents were interviewed, with 1,500 in France and Germany, resulting in nearly 29,000 participants in total. The national samples were designed to reflect the demographic structure of each population, ensuring comparability across countries.
The questionnaire covers a broad range of themes related to democracy and trust. It measures confidence in parliaments, governments, political parties, the judiciary, the European Union, and international organizations, alongside perceptions of competence, fairness, accountability, and integrity. Respondents were asked to assess government performance in areas such as the economy, healthcare, security, and the environment, and to express their levels of satisfaction with democracy both nationally and at the EU level.
Beyond institutional trust, the survey explores political orientations and values, ideological positions, support for populism, and perceptions of polarization. It examines different forms of political participation, including voting, protest, and online engagement, as well as media use, exposure to misinformation, civic knowledge, political efficacy, and support for democratic norms and civil liberties. To complement these modules, the survey also included survey experiments examining how issue framing and context influence citizens’ perceptions of trust. The TRUEDEM survey provides a detailed, comparable dataset on how Europeans evaluate their institutions, leaders, and democratic systems in 2025, offering a valuable basis for research and policy reflection. Survey questionnaire can be accessed here; the dataset will be made available for the public shortly.
Task 8.2. Focus group interviews with citizens.
The project conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) across six European countries—Czech Republic, France, Greece, Italy, Poland, and Romania—to explore citizens’ perceptions of trust and trustworthiness in political systems. These FGDs were designed to complement quantitative data by focusing on the qualitative aspects of trust-building. A total of 21 FGDs were held, with each session consisting of six to ten participants. Recruitment targeted diversity in age, education, and geographic location, while ensuring gender balance. Participants’ political interests and attitudes were collected during the recruitment process but were not used as selection criteria to avoid homogeneity in political orientation.
Each FGD was structured around a standardized guide that ensured consistency across all participating countries. The guide outlined three thematic sequences to steer the discussions. The first sequence focused on identifying important political and social concerns, participants’ satisfaction with the political system, and the actors they trusted to address these issues. Immigration was often introduced as a specific topic within this sequence to explore attitudes toward governance in this area. The second sequence examined trust and trustworthiness in the political system, including the qualities participants valued in political leaders and their views on decision-making processes. Participants were also encouraged to discuss the roles of various actors, such as government, parliament, civil society organizations (CSOs), and the European Union (EU). The third sequence addressed trust in the EU in the context of the upcoming European elections, examining participants’ voting intentions and their evaluation of the EU’s ability to address contemporary challenges.
The FGDs followed a standardized procedure to ensure data quality and consistency. Discussions lasted approximately two hours and were conducted in neutral and accessible venues. Participants were provided with a project information sheet and signed consent forms before the discussions began. Moderators adhered closely to the discussion guide while encouraging open and interactive dialogue. Visual aids, such as diagrams and post-it notes, were used to summarize key points and facilitate engagement. Moderators also employed tools like flashcards to help participants express disagreement or dissent without disrupting the flow of discussion. Audio and video recordings were made of all sessions, and the data were transcribed in the original languages before being anonymized and translated into English.
The FGDs were designed to provide insights into how citizens perceive political trust, evaluate governance, and form judgments about political actors and institutions. By focusing on specific issues and contexts, the discussions contributed to understanding the factors influencing trust and the mechanisms through which trust is built or eroded in European democracies. These findings are integrated into the project’s broader analysis to inform policy recommendations aimed at enhancing democratic governance.
Task 8.3. Expert interviews.
The project conducted expert and elite interviews with politicians and policymakers as part of its qualitative study to explore trust and trustworthiness in European democracies. These interviews targeted elected representatives, executive officials, civil servants, and party officials across ten European countries: Austria, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Italy, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden. A total of 161 interviews were conducted, surpassing the originally planned 155, and included participants from local, national, and European levels. The interviews were semi-structured and aimed at capturing both factual information and subjective opinions about trust-building and political governance.
The interview participants were selected to represent a broad spectrum of political actors, ensuring diversity in roles, gender, age, and political affiliations. Elected representatives from legislative bodies were interviewed at local, national, and European levels, including members of municipal councils, national parliaments, and the European Parliament. Similarly, representatives from executive bodies, such as mayors, government ministers, and European Commission officials, were included. High-level civil servants and political party officials were also engaged to provide insights into administrative and organizational perspectives on trust.
A standardized interview guide was used across all countries to ensure consistency while allowing flexibility to accommodate the unique context of each interviewee. The guide was structured around four main themes: the importance of political trust, perceptions of trustworthiness, the role of democratic innovations, and the influence of media on trust dynamics. Questions encouraged open-ended responses, with supplementary prompts to explore specific aspects further if needed. For instance, participants were asked about the importance of citizens' trust in their work, the qualities they associated with trustworthy politicians, and their views on citizen engagement in policymaking. The role of media and social media in shaping public perceptions of trust was also a key area of inquiry.
The interviews were conducted predominantly in person, with some exceptions for remote interviews using video conferencing tools when necessary. Each interview lasted approximately 45 minutes to an hour, depending on the availability and willingness of the participant. Prior to the interview, participants were provided with a project information sheet outlining the objectives, procedures, and ethical considerations of the research. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, ensuring their voluntary involvement and confidentiality. Audio recordings were made to facilitate accurate transcription and analysis, with all identifying information anonymized during data processing.
The interview methodology emphasized the importance of skilled moderation, requiring interviewers to be well-trained and knowledgeable about the project objectives and political contexts. Flexibility in question sequencing allowed interviewers to adapt to the flow of conversation while ensuring all thematic areas were covered. Pilot tests of the interview guide revealed variations in response depth based on the interviewee's role, leading to refinements in the guide to better suit different political levels.
The data collected from these interviews provides valuable insights into the dynamics of trust and trustworthiness within political systems. By engaging with a diverse group of political actors, the study captured a wide range of perspectives on the challenges and opportunities for enhancing trust in democratic governance. These findings contribute to the broader objectives of the project, informing policy recommendations and theoretical advancements in understanding political trust in Europe.
Task 8.4. Consultations with CSO leaders.
The project organized consultations with civil society organization (CSO) leaders to understand their role in political trust-building and their perceptions of trustworthiness within democratic systems. These consultations took place across ten European countries, including Austria, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Italy, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden, and focused on CSOs working at local, national, and European levels. A total of 159 consultations were conducted, slightly exceeding the originally planned 155.
Participants were selected to represent various types of CSOs, including trade unions, grassroots organizations, social movements, and democracy advocacy organizations. Leaders from these organizations, such as CEOs, presidents, or other high-ranking officials, were targeted as informants. They were chosen based on their comprehensive understanding of their organization's mission, values, and activities, as well as their experience in interacting with policymakers and citizens. To ensure diversity, organizations were selected from different sectors, and only one representative per organization was interviewed. Efforts were made to balance the sample in terms of gender and age to capture a range of experiences.
The consultations employed semi-structured interviews based on a standardized guide, organized into four thematic sections: the role of CSOs in the political system, perceptions of trust and trustworthiness, democratic innovations and trust-building, and the information environment. Interviewers began by introducing the project and gathering background information about the CSO and its activities. They then explored how these organizations were perceived by both citizens and policymakers, the responsibilities they held toward these groups, and their role as intermediaries in fostering trust.
Participants were asked to describe the current state of political trust in their country, discuss the qualities of trustworthy politicians and institutions, and suggest ways to improve trust. They also commented on their experiences with democratic innovations, such as participatory democracy processes, and evaluated their effectiveness in addressing citizens’ concerns. Additionally, the consultations explored the influence of media and social media on political trust, asking participants about their use of various information sources and their perceptions of the media’s role in shaping public opinion.
Interviews typically lasted 45 minutes to an hour and were conducted in person or, in some cases, remotely. Interviewers were required to research the participating organizations beforehand to ensure informed and focused discussions. Participants were provided with project information sheets and signed consent forms to ensure ethical compliance. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and anonymized to protect participants' confidentiality.
The consultations provided insights into the challenges CSOs face in fulfilling their roles as intermediaries between citizens and political institutions. They highlighted the diverse ways in which CSOs contribute to enhancing inclusiveness, transparency, and trust in democratic systems. These findings were intended to inform the project’s broader objectives, including the development of policy recommendations and toolkits for strengthening trust in democratic governance at local, national, and European levels.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse