The power threat meaning framework 5 years on − A scoping review of the emergent empirical literature

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY British journal of psychology Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1111/bjop.12702
Orla Gallagher, Emma E. Regan, Gary O'Reilly
{"title":"The power threat meaning framework 5 years on − A scoping review of the emergent empirical literature","authors":"Orla Gallagher,&nbsp;Emma E. Regan,&nbsp;Gary O'Reilly","doi":"10.1111/bjop.12702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Since its release the Power Threat Meaning Framework (PTMF) has received considerable interest and uptake. However, there have not yet been any attempts to review the scope of this emergent literature. This scoping review aimed to identify and synthesize: (1) all empirical research which utilized the PTMF in their methodologies, (2) the characteristics of these studies, (3) the different ways in which these studies utilized the PTMF, and (4) the key findings of these studies. This review was conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) scoping review extension (PRISMA-ScR). Following systematic searches of academic databases and grey literature, 17 studies meeting eligibility criteria were included. These papers were subject to critical appraisal, data charting, and narrative synthesis. This review identified four uses of the PTMF: (1) PTMF-informed data collection, (2) PTMF-informed data analysis, (3) Experiences of/views on the PTMF, and (4) PTMF-informed psychological practices. This evidence-base demonstrated the merits of utilizing the PTMF across a range of disciplines, settings, and populations. This heterogeneity also presents challenges for evidence synthesis. Implications for research (e.g. importance of the coherent and consistent approach to research) and practice/policy (e.g. professional training, collaboration, service-level barriers) are considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":9300,"journal":{"name":"British journal of psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjop.12702","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since its release the Power Threat Meaning Framework (PTMF) has received considerable interest and uptake. However, there have not yet been any attempts to review the scope of this emergent literature. This scoping review aimed to identify and synthesize: (1) all empirical research which utilized the PTMF in their methodologies, (2) the characteristics of these studies, (3) the different ways in which these studies utilized the PTMF, and (4) the key findings of these studies. This review was conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) scoping review extension (PRISMA-ScR). Following systematic searches of academic databases and grey literature, 17 studies meeting eligibility criteria were included. These papers were subject to critical appraisal, data charting, and narrative synthesis. This review identified four uses of the PTMF: (1) PTMF-informed data collection, (2) PTMF-informed data analysis, (3) Experiences of/views on the PTMF, and (4) PTMF-informed psychological practices. This evidence-base demonstrated the merits of utilizing the PTMF across a range of disciplines, settings, and populations. This heterogeneity also presents challenges for evidence synthesis. Implications for research (e.g. importance of the coherent and consistent approach to research) and practice/policy (e.g. professional training, collaboration, service-level barriers) are considered.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
权力威胁意义框架 5 年之后--对新出现的实证文献的范围审查
自 "权力威胁含义框架"(Power Threat Meaning Framework,PTMF)发布以来,受到了广泛关注和采用。然而,目前还没有人尝试对这一新兴文献的范围进行回顾。本次范围界定综述旨在确定并归纳:(1) 所有在方法论中使用 PTMF 的实证研究,(2) 这些研究的特点,(3) 这些研究使用 PTMF 的不同方式,以及 (4) 这些研究的主要发现。本综述按照系统综述和元分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)范围综述扩展(PRISMA-ScR)进行。在对学术数据库和灰色文献进行系统检索后,共纳入了 17 项符合资格标准的研究。对这些论文进行了批判性评估、数据制图和叙述性综合。本综述确定了 PTMF 的四种用途:(1) 基于 PTMF 的数据收集,(2) 基于 PTMF 的数据分析,(3) 对 PTMF 的体验/看法,以及 (4) 基于 PTMF 的心理实践。这些证据表明,在不同学科、环境和人群中使用 PTMF 有其优点。这种异质性也给证据综合带来了挑战。研究还考虑了对研究(如连贯一致的研究方法的重要性)和实践/政策(如专业培训、合作、服务层面的障碍)的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British journal of psychology
British journal of psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.50%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Psychology publishes original research on all aspects of general psychology including cognition; health and clinical psychology; developmental, social and occupational psychology. For information on specific requirements, please view Notes for Contributors. We attract a large number of international submissions each year which make major contributions across the range of psychology.
期刊最新文献
Unpacking interplays between competitiveness, cooperativeness, and social comparison orientation: A network psychometric approach and replication Positive and negative touch differentially modulate metacognitive memory judgements for emotional stimuli People have different expectations for their own versus others' use of AI-mediated communication tools. Social sharing of emotion during the collective crisis of COVID-19. Mirroring brains: How we understand others from the inside By GiacomoRizzolatti, CorradoSinigaglia. Translated by Frances Andersen, New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 2023. Hardcover US$ 46.99. ISBN: 9780198871705
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1