Acknowledgment of collective victimization: Findings from four contexts of historical victimization

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy Pub Date : 2024-11-24 DOI:10.1111/asap.12440
Michelle Sinayobye Twali, Sherief Y. Eldeeb, Johanna Ray Vollhardt
{"title":"Acknowledgment of collective victimization: Findings from four contexts of historical victimization","authors":"Michelle Sinayobye Twali,&nbsp;Sherief Y. Eldeeb,&nbsp;Johanna Ray Vollhardt","doi":"10.1111/asap.12440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Acknowledgment of collective victimization is often understood as a crucial precursor to promoting victimized groups’ well-being and breaking the cycle of violence. Yet, research on acknowledgment has focused on a few forms of acknowledgment from the perpetrator group, thus limiting our understanding on what acknowledgment entails and who should engage in it. Furthermore, what is considered to be appropriate acknowledgment may be shaped by the historical and sociopolitical context. To address these issues, we conducted a qualitative online survey that explored how four historical victim groups (Armenian Americans, Black Americans, Jewish Americans, and the Palestinian diaspora, total <i>N</i> = 273) perceive how acknowledgment of their group's collective trauma should look like. Qualitative content analysis revealed four broad theoretical categories of what acknowledgment entails: symbolic gestures, knowledge and education, structural redress, and learning lessons and preventing violence. We also found four categories concerning who should acknowledge the ingroup's trauma: everyone, adversaries, the ingroup, and third parties. Responses varied across groups, suggesting the importance of the sociopolitical context in acknowledgment. The findings extend theoretical and empirical work on acknowledgment and have important program and policy implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.12440","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Acknowledgment of collective victimization is often understood as a crucial precursor to promoting victimized groups’ well-being and breaking the cycle of violence. Yet, research on acknowledgment has focused on a few forms of acknowledgment from the perpetrator group, thus limiting our understanding on what acknowledgment entails and who should engage in it. Furthermore, what is considered to be appropriate acknowledgment may be shaped by the historical and sociopolitical context. To address these issues, we conducted a qualitative online survey that explored how four historical victim groups (Armenian Americans, Black Americans, Jewish Americans, and the Palestinian diaspora, total N = 273) perceive how acknowledgment of their group's collective trauma should look like. Qualitative content analysis revealed four broad theoretical categories of what acknowledgment entails: symbolic gestures, knowledge and education, structural redress, and learning lessons and preventing violence. We also found four categories concerning who should acknowledge the ingroup's trauma: everyone, adversaries, the ingroup, and third parties. Responses varied across groups, suggesting the importance of the sociopolitical context in acknowledgment. The findings extend theoretical and empirical work on acknowledgment and have important program and policy implications.

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
集体受害的承认:从历史受害的四种语境的发现
承认集体受害往往被理解为促进受害群体福祉和打破暴力循环的关键前兆。然而,关于承认的研究主要集中在肇事者群体的几种形式的承认上,从而限制了我们对承认需要什么以及谁应该参与承认的理解。此外,什么是适当的承认可能会受到历史和社会政治背景的影响。为了解决这些问题,我们进行了一项定性在线调查,探讨了四个历史受害者群体(亚美尼亚裔美国人、黑人美国人、犹太美国人和散居的巴勒斯坦人,总人数为273人)如何看待承认他们群体的集体创伤。定性内容分析揭示了承认所需要的四个广泛的理论类别:象征性姿态、知识和教育、结构性纠正、学习教训和防止暴力。我们还发现了四种类型的人应该承认内部团体的创伤:每个人、对手、内部团体和第三方。不同群体的反应各不相同,这表明社会政治背景对承认的重要性。研究结果扩展了关于承认的理论和实证工作,并具有重要的计划和政策意义。
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
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Recent articles in ASAP have examined social psychological methods in the study of economic and social justice including ageism, heterosexism, racism, sexism, status quo bias and other forms of discrimination, social problems such as climate change, extremism, homelessness, inter-group conflict, natural disasters, poverty, and terrorism, and social ideals such as democracy, empowerment, equality, health, and trust.
期刊最新文献
Understanding the link between home displacement and indication of PTSD in collective trauma: Community resilience as a mediator Is academia for everyone? A closer look into the experiences of U.S. psychology doctoral students No es Nada del Otro Mundo: Dissecting the racial and motivational predictors of the “Latino Vote” Dissecting how ideological orientations predict attributions and policy attitudes toward unhoused individuals Understanding the “new” disruptive behavior at live music events: Group normative (mis)alignment and collective self-regulation
×
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:604180095
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