Introduction Critiquing a study should focus on the importance of its purposes and the adequacy of methods to answer its research questions. Such a focus will allow discussing the justification of the study and the validity of its results. Yang (2005) addresses the issue of public administrators’ trust in citizens and identifies four research questions: Is this trust an important issue? Is it a valid notion that is different from other notions normally addressed in public administration studies? What factors affect the degree of trust? How does public administrators’ trust affect citizen involvement efforts? To answer these questions, the author reviews relevant academic literature, which constitutes the theoretical, conceptual part of the study, and conducts a survey of 320 public administrators, which provides primary data and valuable perspectives on the issue from actual practitioners. Main body First of all, the author’s theoretical framework needs to be assessed, i.e. the position from which the concept of trust is approached and measured. For this purpose, it is necessary to address the author’s definition. Yang (2005) uses an existing definition employed by researchers in different areas that states that trust is a “psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another” (p. 275). From the very beginning, the author states that mutual trust is a prerequisite for successful interactions. In public administration, citizens’ trust is crucial because the lack of it lowers the level of civic engagement and subsequently decreases the effectiveness and quality of public management. Yang (2005) acknowledges that many studies have been dedicated to this issue, but not much attention has been paid to the opposite direction, i.e. the administrators’ trust in citizens. The article’s author reflects on academic literature and conducts a study to confirm that administrators’ trust is pivotal in trying to increase civic participation. Moreover, it is stated that “administrators’ negative attitudes toward citizens have been identified as a major barrier to authentic public participation” (Yang, 2005, p. 274). These negative attitudes include distrust, i.e. the idea that may be shared by public administrators that citizens are incapable of contributing to successful decision-making. Among different aspects of this distrust, the article’s author stresses the perception of citizens as incompetent, unbalanced (incapable of expressing definitive intentions), and indifferent (uncommitted to be engaged). The study confirms that many public administrators distrust citizens, which essentially undermines their potential efforts in increasing citizen involvement. The author’s reasoning is rather convincing: if administrators do not believe in citizens’ abilities to make a positive contribution to the public decision-making process, they will be unwilling to engage citizens in administrative processes or to encourage participation. Conclusion As a result of the study, the author confirms that public administrators’ trust in citizens is a relevant and separate issue and that it does affect citizen involvement efforts in direct proportion: a higher degree of trust leads to a higher level of involvement