Trust in technology is a topic of growing importance in Human–Computer Interaction due to the growing impact of systems on daily lives. However, limited attention has been paid to how one’s national culture shapes their propensity to trust. This study addresses an existing gap in trust in technology research by advancing towards a more accurate tool for quantitatively measuring propensity to trust across different contexts. We specifically evaluate the psychometric properties of the human–computer trust scale (HCTS) in Brazil, Singapore, Malaysia, Estonia, and Mongolia. To accomplish this, we used the Measurement Invariance of Composite Models (MICOM), a procedure that examines the equivalency of the instrument’s psychometric properties across different groups. Our results highlight the importance of rigorous validation processes when applying psychometric instruments in cross-cultural contexts, offering insights into the differences between the countries investigated and the procedure’s potential to investigate trust across different groups.

The increasing presence of technology in our lives has led to the reliance on systems that are difficult to understand. As individuals entrust more complex tasks to technology, understanding the factors that influence users′ trust in them becomes essential. Nevertheless, current trust–assessment methods are often limited in scope or validity. This article builds on previous research and aims to deepen our understanding of the factors that affect users′ trust in technology. The first objective is to enhance the human–computer trust scale (HCTS), an existing trust assessment instrument, by evaluating the validity of a new component that we believe can better capture the sociotechnical nature of current systems. Second is to explore whether culture plays a moderating role in trust assessment by comparing studies in Brazil ( N = 133) and Singapore ( N = 108). We present the procedure followed for the studies and the results of the partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS‐SEM) analysis used to assess our hypotheses. The results demonstrate that a new component proved valid in both cases and supports the moderating effect of culture. This article contributes to the human–computer interaction literature by advancing toward a more reliable tool for assessing trust in technology and highlights the influence of culture on user trust, which should inform trust assessment and design decisions.