Document Type : Original Article


Social Determinates of Health Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran


Background: In all areas of life including health, choices have widely increased and
concerns over getting hold of further choices have made trust a necessary element. This
study, taking into consideration the interconnection of three concepts of trust, risk, and
body, aims at describing and interpreting different types of trust experienced in a risky
medical operation (cosmetic surgery). Materials and Methods: To achieve the given
purpose, within interpretative paradigm and employing qualitative method, in‑depth
phenomenological interviews were conducted with 26 people who volunteered to have
a cosmetic surgery. Participants, who have been selected through purposive sampling
techniques, were fully aware of their participation in the study and were insured that the
data would be confidential and would be used only for the purpose of the study. Data
were gathered within a one‑year period of the study, from February 20, 2012 to February
20, 2013. Results of three‑phase interviews were validated against participatory feedback
and researchers’ triangulation and were further analyzed by means of seven‑stage
Colaizzi method. Findings: Consequently, five main themes, namely, vicarious trust, trust
within the reach, institutionalized trust, criterion trust, and wrapped trust were extracted.
Conclusion: Apart from existing differences among these five themes (e.g. degree of the
subjectivity and objectivity in the patient), they can be regarded comparable in terms of
being single‑sided (from the patient’s side).In other words, in all experiences, participants,
having considered “the necessity of gaining trust” as a presupposition, have made a
unilateral effort in creating the aforementioned phenomenon.


1. Sztompka P. Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge: University
Press; 2003.
2. Silver A. “Trust” in social and political theory. In: Suttles GD,
Zald MN, editors. The challenge of social control, norwood, mass.
New York: Ablex Publishers; 1985.
3. Gabe J, Bury M, Elston MA. Key concepts in medical sociology.
London: Sage Publication; 2004.
4. Lupton, D. Risk (key ideas). London: Routledge Publisher; 2005.
5. Tavasoli GH, Dadhir A. The knowledge-policy relations in a risky
society: A sociological reflection on the development of the risky
administrative societies in the current era. Iran SocJ1388; 10:22-42.
6. Giddens A. The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity
Press; 1990.
7. Harrison PR. Niklas Luhmann and the theory of social systems. In:
Abazari Y, Translator. The Arghanoon Quarterly Journal, 17 (original
work published in 1995). 2000: 19-50.
8. Lupton D. Fear and the reflective modernization. In: Rafat Jah M,
Translator. The Arghanoon Quarterly Journal, 18, (original work
published in 1999). 2001: 293-316.
9. Beck U, Giddens A, Lash S. Reflexive modernization. Cambridge:
Polity Press; 1994.
10. Synnott A. Tomb, temple, machine and self: the social construction
of the body. Br J Sociol 1992; 43: 79-110.
11. Wilkinson I. Risk, vulnerability and everyday Life. London:
Routledge; 2001.
12. Giddens A. The modernity and the distinction: Society and the
personal identity in the new era. In: Movafaghian N, Trans. 4th ed.
Tehran: Ney Publication; 1385. (Original work published in 1991).
13. Williams SJ. Modern medicine and the “uncertain body”: From
corporeality to hyperreality? Soc Sci Med 1997; 45:1041-9.
14. Iman M. Paradigmatic basis of the qualitative and quantitative
research methods in humanities. Ghom, Iran: Research Institute
of Hawzah and University; 1388.
15. Bloor M, Wood F. Keywords in qualitative methods: A vocabulary
of research concepts. London: Sage Publication; 2006.
16. Mohammadpour A. The anti-method: The logic and the plan in
qualitative methodology. Tehran: The Sociologists Publication;
17. Mohammadpour A. The anti-method: The steps and the practical
procedure in the qualitative methodology. Tehran: The Sociologists
Publication; 1390.
18. Given LM. The sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods.
London: Sage Publication; 2008.
19. Schuman D. Policy analysis, education, and everyday life: An
empirical reevaluation of higher education in America. Lexington,
Mass: D. C. Heath; 1982.
20. Seidman I. Interviewing as qualitative research. London: Teachers
College Press; 2005.
21. Collizzi P. Psychological research as the phenomenologist views
it. In: Valls RS, King M, editors, Existential phenomenological
alternatives for psychology. New York: Oxford University Press;
1978. p. 48-71.
22. Knafl KA, Webster DC. Managing and Analyzing Qualitative Data:
A Description of Tasks, Techniques and Materials. West J Nurs
Res1988; 10:195-218.
23. Flick U. An Introduction to qualitative research. In: Jalili H, Trans.
Tehran: Ney Publication; (original work published in 1998); 2009.
24. Ghane’ei Rad M, Karimi M. The cultural plays of the death and dying.
Q JCult Stud Commun1385; 2:51-73.