Reactive guardianship: Who intervenes? How? And why?

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Criminology Pub Date : 2024-09-07 DOI:10.1111/1745-9125.12380
Timothy C. Barnum, Shaina Herman, Jean-Louis van Gelder, Denis Ribeaud, Manuel Eisner, Daniel S. Nagin
{"title":"Reactive guardianship: Who intervenes? How? And why?","authors":"Timothy C. Barnum,&nbsp;Shaina Herman,&nbsp;Jean-Louis van Gelder,&nbsp;Denis Ribeaud,&nbsp;Manuel Eisner,&nbsp;Daniel S. Nagin","doi":"10.1111/1745-9125.12380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Guardianship is a core tenet of routine activity theory and collective efficacy. At its outset, routine activity research assumed that the mere presence of a guardian was sufficient to disrupt many forms of crime. More recent research, however, has taken as a starting point that would-be-guardians must take on an active role for a reduction in crime to occur. Integrating research on bystander intervention and guardianship-in-action, the current study elaborates the individual-level motivations and decision processes of guardianship to answer the following questions: Who serves as a reactive guardian? How do they do so? And why? We tasked young adults (N = 1,032) included in the recent waves of the Zurich Project on the Social Development from Childhood to Adulthood (z-proso) to assess a 70-second video depicting a sexual harassment event. We examined participants’ willingness to engage in a range of intervention options as a function of their prosocial attitudes, safety considerations, socioemotional motivations, and moral considerations. Results show a complex decision process leading to whether and how a would-be guardian decides to intervene to disrupt sexual harassment, such that prosocial motivations and emotional reactions are weighed against perceptions of danger when deciding on a specific course of action.</p>","PeriodicalId":48385,"journal":{"name":"Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1745-9125.12380","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9125.12380","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Guardianship is a core tenet of routine activity theory and collective efficacy. At its outset, routine activity research assumed that the mere presence of a guardian was sufficient to disrupt many forms of crime. More recent research, however, has taken as a starting point that would-be-guardians must take on an active role for a reduction in crime to occur. Integrating research on bystander intervention and guardianship-in-action, the current study elaborates the individual-level motivations and decision processes of guardianship to answer the following questions: Who serves as a reactive guardian? How do they do so? And why? We tasked young adults (N = 1,032) included in the recent waves of the Zurich Project on the Social Development from Childhood to Adulthood (z-proso) to assess a 70-second video depicting a sexual harassment event. We examined participants’ willingness to engage in a range of intervention options as a function of their prosocial attitudes, safety considerations, socioemotional motivations, and moral considerations. Results show a complex decision process leading to whether and how a would-be guardian decides to intervene to disrupt sexual harassment, such that prosocial motivations and emotional reactions are weighed against perceptions of danger when deciding on a specific course of action.

Abstract Image

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
反应式监护:谁来干预?如何干预?为什么?
监护是常规活动理论和集体效能的核心原则。常规活动研究一开始假定,监护人的存在就足以破坏多种形式的犯罪。然而,最近的研究认为,要减少犯罪,潜在的监护人必须发挥积极作用。结合旁观者干预和行动监护的研究,本研究阐述了个人层面的监护动机和决策过程,以回答以下问题:谁是被动监护人?他们是如何充当的?为什么?我们让最近几波苏黎世儿童到成年社会发展项目(z-proso)中的年轻成年人(N = 1,032)对一段描述性骚扰事件的 70 秒视频进行评估。我们根据参与者的亲社会态度、安全考虑、社会情感动机和道德考虑,考察了他们参与一系列干预方案的意愿。结果显示,潜在监护人决定是否干预性骚扰以及如何干预的决策过程非常复杂,在决定具体行动方案时,亲社会动机和情绪反应与危险感之间需要进行权衡。
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
Criminology
Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
6.90%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Criminology is devoted to crime and deviant behavior. Disciplines covered in Criminology include: - sociology - psychology - design - systems analysis - decision theory Major emphasis is placed on empirical research and scientific methodology. Criminology"s content also includes articles which review the literature or deal with theoretical issues stated in the literature as well as suggestions for the types of investigation which might be carried out in the future.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The accumulated impact of critical incident exposure on correctional officers’ mental health Reactive guardianship: Who intervenes? How? And why? Understanding community hate crimes as an incorrigible proposition: Local political attitudes, path dependence, and the ceremonious reporting of hate crime statistics Understanding the role of street network configurations in the placement of illegitimately operating facilities
×
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