In this chapter, we explore the effects of anxiety on political trust. We argue that one method that citizens use to cope with the uncertainty and negative affect that underlie political anxiety is to turn toward political actors who can provide information and advocate policies that will protect them from threats. Higher levels of distress make people less confident in their preferences and political choices (Druckman and McDermott 2008; Loewenstein et al. 2001), making trust in external actors more appealing. Particularly when those actors possess some expertise based on their training, office, or access to information, they are especially appealing. By putting trust in political actors who are perceived to be knowledgeable and expert, citizens motivated to lower anxiety can start to feel better. Like the Biblical Israelites, Americans who are afraid want to put their trust in actors who can effectively protect them, but, rather than turning solely to the Lord, modern citizens might choose to put their trust in government experts.

We use public health and immigration as two cases where anxiety may influence citizens’ trust in a variety of public actors. By focusing on which actors citizens turn toward when anxiety is high, we explore whether anxiety-driven trust is targeted or diffuse and to what extent partisanship plays a role. We argue that anxiety may either increase or decrease trust, depending on whether the political actor is seen as responsible for the anxiety. We also argue that anxiety-driven trust is targeted. Anxious citizens do not simply become more trusting in the political system as a whole; they selectively trust in expert actors, those with relevant power and experience to alleviate threats. Who those relevant actors are depends on the threat. When threats come from outside the government, anxious citizens may become more trusting of a host of political actors with relevant expertise. When threats are perceived to originate from government failings, though, the political context may be more polarized, and partisanship may shape which actors are seen as relevant. When threats come from government action (or inaction), citizens may then turn toward actors who are relevant to or “own” the policy area (Petrocik 1996) because they are seen as the party most competent to execute policies to ease these threats.