While trust in news media has come to the forefront of scholarly and public debate in recent years, academic researchers have raised persistent concern that measurement issues have prevented a better understanding of the concept. This research introduces an item response theory (IRT) perspective to advance the state-of-the-art in media trust measurement beyond recent conceptual and analytical progress. I argue that standard survey instruments that concentrate on the perceived believability of news media restrict our capability to measure truly low media trust. Furthermore, I suggest an important yet previously unnoticed pathway to overcoming this restriction in a scale by Abdulla et al. that captures currency perceptions alongside believability perceptions. Using a representative survey conducted in Germany, I find robust empirical evidence that capturing currency vs. believability perceptions significantly impacts our ability to accurately measure lower vs. higher levels of media trust. The findings have implications for not only studies of media trust’s associations with antecedent and consequential constructs but any attempt to determine the true amount and divergence of citizens’ media trust. More generally, the results demonstrate how IRT aids in putting scholarly debates on the dimensionality and interplay of trust with distrust on more common and fruitful grounds.

尽管近年来对新闻媒体的信任已成为学术和公众辩论的焦点，但学术研究人员一直担心衡量问题阻碍了对这一概念的更好理解。这项研究引入了项目反应理论（IRT）的观点，以超越最近的概念和分析进展来推进媒体信任测量的最先进水平。我认为，专注于新闻媒体可信度的标准调查工具限制了我们衡量真正低媒体信任度的能力。此外，我提出了一个重要但之前未被注意到的途径，以克服阿卜杜拉等人的规模的这一限制。它捕捉了货币认知和可信度认知。使用在德国进行的代表性调查，我发现强有力的经验证据表明，捕捉货币与可信度认知会显着影响我们准确衡量较低与较高媒体信任水平的能力。这些发现不仅对媒体信任与先因和后果结构的关联研究具有影响，而且对确定公民媒体信任的真实数量和差异的任何尝试都有影响。更一般地说，结果表明 IRT 如何帮助将关于信任与不信任的维度和相互作用的学术辩论置于更普遍和富有成效的基础上。这些发现不仅对媒体信任与先因和后果结构的关联研究具有影响，而且对确定公民媒体信任的真实数量和差异的任何尝试都有影响。更一般地说，结果表明 IRT 如何帮助将关于信任与不信任的维度和相互作用的学术辩论置于更普遍和富有成效的基础上。这些发现不仅对媒体信任与先因和后果结构的关联研究具有影响，而且对确定公民媒体信任的真实数量和差异的任何尝试都有影响。更一般地说，结果表明 IRT 如何帮助将关于信任与不信任的维度和相互作用的学术辩论置于更普遍和富有成效的基础上。