Coercive Control in 2SLGBTQQIA+ Relationships: A Scoping Review.

IF 5.4 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Trauma Violence & Abuse Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-26 DOI:10.1177/15248380241257957
N Zoe Hilton, Elke Ham, Dana L Radatz, Chris M Smith, Natalie Snow, Jolene Wintermute, Emma Jennings-Fitz-Gerald, Jimin Lee, Sydney Patterson
{"title":"Coercive Control in 2SLGBTQQIA+ Relationships: A Scoping Review.","authors":"N Zoe Hilton, Elke Ham, Dana L Radatz, Chris M Smith, Natalie Snow, Jolene Wintermute, Emma Jennings-Fitz-Gerald, Jimin Lee, Sydney Patterson","doi":"10.1177/15248380241257957","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Existing measures and theories of intimate partner coercive control largely evaluate men's coercion of women. The extent of knowledge pertaining to intimate relationships among other genders and sexual identities is unclear. Guided by a theoretical framework of intersectionality, we examined and synthesized original studies on coercive control by (perpetration) or against (victimization) Two Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, and asexual individuals within intimate partner relationships. We searched eight academic databases for records from 2014 through 2022 and hand-searched review articles' reference lists, supplemented with gray literature and website searches. Using duplicate screening, we identified 1,774 unique documents; 526 met preliminary eligibility criteria and 277 were retained for data extraction in duplicate. Coercive control was more common among minority individuals and was related to mental health challenges. Few studies reported on gender- or sexual-identity specific forms of coercive control, and an intersectional focus was uncommon. This review revealed a lack of agreed definition of coercive control or accepted standard of measurement, and a gap in research with individuals who identify as gender diverse, gender fluid or intersex, or those identifying their sexuality as asexual, pansexual, or sexually diverse.</p>","PeriodicalId":54211,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","volume":" ","pages":"3713-3728"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11545122/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380241257957","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Existing measures and theories of intimate partner coercive control largely evaluate men's coercion of women. The extent of knowledge pertaining to intimate relationships among other genders and sexual identities is unclear. Guided by a theoretical framework of intersectionality, we examined and synthesized original studies on coercive control by (perpetration) or against (victimization) Two Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, and asexual individuals within intimate partner relationships. We searched eight academic databases for records from 2014 through 2022 and hand-searched review articles' reference lists, supplemented with gray literature and website searches. Using duplicate screening, we identified 1,774 unique documents; 526 met preliminary eligibility criteria and 277 were retained for data extraction in duplicate. Coercive control was more common among minority individuals and was related to mental health challenges. Few studies reported on gender- or sexual-identity specific forms of coercive control, and an intersectional focus was uncommon. This review revealed a lack of agreed definition of coercive control or accepted standard of measurement, and a gap in research with individuals who identify as gender diverse, gender fluid or intersex, or those identifying their sexuality as asexual, pansexual, or sexually diverse.

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
2SLGBTQQIA+ 关系中的胁迫性控制:范围审查。
现有的亲密伴侣胁迫性控制措施和理论主要评估男性对女性的胁迫。对其他性别和性别身份的亲密关系的了解程度还不清楚。在交叉性理论框架的指导下,我们研究并综合了关于亲密伴侣关系中的双性人、女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性人、同性恋者、质疑者、双性人和无性人的胁迫性控制(实施)或针对他们的胁迫性控制(受害)的原始研究。我们检索了八个学术数据库中 2014 年至 2022 年的记录,并手工检索了综述文章的参考文献目录,同时辅以灰色文献和网站检索。通过重复筛选,我们确定了 1,774 篇独特的文献;其中 526 篇符合初步资格标准,277 篇被保留下来进行重复数据提取。胁迫性控制在少数群体中更为常见,并且与心理健康挑战有关。很少有研究报告了针对性别或性别认同的胁迫性控制的具体形式,交叉性的关注点也不常见。本综述显示,胁迫性控制缺乏一致的定义或公认的衡量标准,对性别多元化、性别不固定或双性人,或将自己的性行为认定为无性、泛性或性多元化的人的研究也存在空白。
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
CiteScore
13.60
自引率
7.80%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is devoted to organizing, synthesizing, and expanding knowledge on all force of trauma, abuse, and violence. This peer-reviewed journal is practitioner oriented and will publish only reviews of research, conceptual or theoretical articles, and law review articles. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is dedicated to professionals and advanced students in clinical training who work with any form of trauma, abuse, and violence. It is intended to compile knowledge that clearly affects practice, policy, and research.
期刊最新文献
A Scoping Review of the Intimate Partner Violence Literature Among Afghans Across Contexts. Bias-Based Cyberaggression Related To Origin, Religion, Sexual Orientation, Gender, and Weight: Systematic Review of Young People's Experiences, Risk and Protective Factors, and the Consequences. Racial/Ethnic Differences in Adverse Childhood Experiences and Health-Related Outcomes: A Scoping Review. Understanding the Dynamics of Domestic Violence During the First Year of the Pandemic: An Integrative Review. Parental Resilience in Contexts of Political Violence: A Systematic Scoping Review of 45 Years of Research.
×
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