Nikolaos Koukopoulos, Madeleine Janickyj, Leonie Maria Tanczer
{"title":"Defining and Conceptualizing Technology-Facilitated Abuse (“Tech Abuse”): Findings of a Global Delphi Study","authors":"Nikolaos Koukopoulos, Madeleine Janickyj, Leonie Maria Tanczer","doi":"10.1177/08862605241310465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Technology-facilitated abuse (TFA) describes the misuse or repurposing of digital systems to harass, coerce, or abuse. It is a global problem involving both existing and emerging technologies. Despite significant work across research, policy, and practice to understand the issue, the field operates within linguistic, conceptual, and disciplinary silos, inhibiting collaboration. To address this, the present study used the Delphi technique to reach a consensus on TFA conceptualization, definition, terminology, and measurement among subject experts. Following a literature review, a global, cross-disciplinary sample of academics, practitioners, and policymakers ( n = 316) reflected on TFA across three survey rounds. The results showed both aligned and opposing perspectives. “Technology” and “facilitated” were the most preferable terms. Still, there was uncertainty regarding the need for additional terminologies to denote the scope of abuse, such as gendered descriptors. Participants had little familiarity with existing TFA measurement tools, with two-thirds unaware of any. Most experts agreed on conceptualizing TFA based on the perpetrator’s behavior, the victim’s harm and impact, and consent. They also supported an expansive TFA definition, beyond intimate relationships, that can involve groups and communities as perpetrators or targets. However, they were more reluctant to perceive TFA as a distinct abuse form, or one guided by social norms, legal thresholds, or involving child perpetrators. The findings are discussed in the context of the current TFA landscape, along with study limitations and steps to achieve a more unified TFA understanding.","PeriodicalId":16289,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241310465","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Technology-facilitated abuse (TFA) describes the misuse or repurposing of digital systems to harass, coerce, or abuse. It is a global problem involving both existing and emerging technologies. Despite significant work across research, policy, and practice to understand the issue, the field operates within linguistic, conceptual, and disciplinary silos, inhibiting collaboration. To address this, the present study used the Delphi technique to reach a consensus on TFA conceptualization, definition, terminology, and measurement among subject experts. Following a literature review, a global, cross-disciplinary sample of academics, practitioners, and policymakers ( n = 316) reflected on TFA across three survey rounds. The results showed both aligned and opposing perspectives. “Technology” and “facilitated” were the most preferable terms. Still, there was uncertainty regarding the need for additional terminologies to denote the scope of abuse, such as gendered descriptors. Participants had little familiarity with existing TFA measurement tools, with two-thirds unaware of any. Most experts agreed on conceptualizing TFA based on the perpetrator’s behavior, the victim’s harm and impact, and consent. They also supported an expansive TFA definition, beyond intimate relationships, that can involve groups and communities as perpetrators or targets. However, they were more reluctant to perceive TFA as a distinct abuse form, or one guided by social norms, legal thresholds, or involving child perpetrators. The findings are discussed in the context of the current TFA landscape, along with study limitations and steps to achieve a more unified TFA understanding.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Interpersonal Violence is devoted to the study and treatment of victims and perpetrators of interpersonal violence. It provides a forum of discussion of the concerns and activities of professionals and researchers working in domestic violence, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual assault, physical child abuse, and violent crime. With its dual focus on victims and victimizers, the journal will publish material that addresses the causes, effects, treatment, and prevention of all types of violence. JIV only publishes reports on individual studies in which the scientific method is applied to the study of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Research may use qualitative or quantitative methods. JIV does not publish reviews of research, individual case studies, or the conceptual analysis of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Outcome data for program or intervention evaluations must include a comparison or control group.