Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Despite the rapid expansion of digital public services, their impact on political trust remains theoretically and empirically contested. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s constructivist theory of practice, this article argues that trust should not be understood merely as a reflection of the quality of digital services. Rather, it is conceptualized as an internal component of agents’ practices, where the key factor is not simply digital knowledge or literacy, but the degree of involvement and immersion in digitally mediated social contexts. The study relies on a content analysis of research literature on the digitalization of public services, e-government, and Internet voting in Russia and other national contexts. The findings suggest that the relationship between the digitalization of state–citizen interactions and political trust is indirect. This relationship operates through the following sequence: digitalization of public services → trust environments (formed around specific digital practices) → digital trust culture → practices of political participation → political trust. The effectiveness of this model in contemporary Russia depends on both temporal and spatial factors. The analysis shows that government policy is primarily oriented toward creating “comfortable everyday life” through the widespread implementation of digital technologies. This approach can function as a mechanism for increasing social and political trust. However, given the amorphous and weakly organized nature of Russian society, as well as its social inertia, such effects are likely to be significant but short-term.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Линченко et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: