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://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
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
LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs and collective actions: Factors and processes that (de)motivate support for LGBTQ+ equality Founder ownership and system-justifying beliefs in relation to perception toward Black Lives Matter and other social movements When longing goes wrong: Nostalgia can cause a preference for harmful aspects of the past Exploring disparities in research through the lens of epistemic exclusion: A focus on Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy Testing the interrelationship between area deprivation and ethnic disparities in sentencing
×
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