Agnes Rieger, Allyson M. Blackburn, Apoorva Nag, Hope Holland, Nicole E. Allen
{"title":"变化中的矛盾:实施外层性暴力预防的生态因素。","authors":"Agnes Rieger, Allyson M. Blackburn, Apoorva Nag, Hope Holland, Nicole E. Allen","doi":"10.1002/ajcp.12672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examined the adoption and implementation process in early efforts to implement ecological (“outer layer”) sexual violence (SV) prevention strategies. Interviews with 28 preventionists from 26 local sites within a large, midwestern state, were conducted to examine individual preventionists' problem definitions of SV and ecological factors surrounding implementation. Findings suggest that SV prevention in the state is primarily implemented at the individual-level; when preventionists described engaging in or anticipating outer layer interventions, they were often tertiary (i.e., responding after perpetration; e.g., Sexual Assault Response Teams). A majority expressed problem definitions rooted within the individual (e.g., perpetration due to a lack of consent education), and a majority of implemented efforts matched this individual-level conceptualization. Yet, contradictions between problem definitions (e.g., SV stemming from oppression) and implemented activities (e.g., single-session educational interventions) emerged. Such contradictions may be best understood in light of contextual implementation influences: diverse preventionist job responsibilities, less training/support for outer layer prevention, preventionist autonomy, leadership messaging, time requirements, partner reticence, and extensive work with schools. Inner layer influences, including identification with job roles, preference for, and a sense of urgency toward inner layer work, appeared to interact with contextual factors. Implications across community psychology domains are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":7576,"journal":{"name":"American journal of community psychology","volume":"72 1-2","pages":"15-31"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajcp.12672","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contradictions in change: Ecological factors in the implementation of outer layer sexual violence prevention\",\"authors\":\"Agnes Rieger, Allyson M. Blackburn, Apoorva Nag, Hope Holland, Nicole E. Allen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ajcp.12672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study examined the adoption and implementation process in early efforts to implement ecological (“outer layer”) sexual violence (SV) prevention strategies. Interviews with 28 preventionists from 26 local sites within a large, midwestern state, were conducted to examine individual preventionists' problem definitions of SV and ecological factors surrounding implementation. Findings suggest that SV prevention in the state is primarily implemented at the individual-level; when preventionists described engaging in or anticipating outer layer interventions, they were often tertiary (i.e., responding after perpetration; e.g., Sexual Assault Response Teams). A majority expressed problem definitions rooted within the individual (e.g., perpetration due to a lack of consent education), and a majority of implemented efforts matched this individual-level conceptualization. Yet, contradictions between problem definitions (e.g., SV stemming from oppression) and implemented activities (e.g., single-session educational interventions) emerged. Such contradictions may be best understood in light of contextual implementation influences: diverse preventionist job responsibilities, less training/support for outer layer prevention, preventionist autonomy, leadership messaging, time requirements, partner reticence, and extensive work with schools. Inner layer influences, including identification with job roles, preference for, and a sense of urgency toward inner layer work, appeared to interact with contextual factors. Implications across community psychology domains are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7576,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of community psychology\",\"volume\":\"72 1-2\",\"pages\":\"15-31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajcp.12672\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of community psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajcp.12672\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of community psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajcp.12672","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Contradictions in change: Ecological factors in the implementation of outer layer sexual violence prevention
This study examined the adoption and implementation process in early efforts to implement ecological (“outer layer”) sexual violence (SV) prevention strategies. Interviews with 28 preventionists from 26 local sites within a large, midwestern state, were conducted to examine individual preventionists' problem definitions of SV and ecological factors surrounding implementation. Findings suggest that SV prevention in the state is primarily implemented at the individual-level; when preventionists described engaging in or anticipating outer layer interventions, they were often tertiary (i.e., responding after perpetration; e.g., Sexual Assault Response Teams). A majority expressed problem definitions rooted within the individual (e.g., perpetration due to a lack of consent education), and a majority of implemented efforts matched this individual-level conceptualization. Yet, contradictions between problem definitions (e.g., SV stemming from oppression) and implemented activities (e.g., single-session educational interventions) emerged. Such contradictions may be best understood in light of contextual implementation influences: diverse preventionist job responsibilities, less training/support for outer layer prevention, preventionist autonomy, leadership messaging, time requirements, partner reticence, and extensive work with schools. Inner layer influences, including identification with job roles, preference for, and a sense of urgency toward inner layer work, appeared to interact with contextual factors. Implications across community psychology domains are discussed.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Community Psychology publishes original quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research; theoretical papers; empirical reviews; reports of innovative community programs or policies; and first person accounts of stakeholders involved in research, programs, or policy. The journal encourages submissions of innovative multi-level research and interventions, and encourages international submissions. The journal also encourages the submission of manuscripts concerned with underrepresented populations and issues of human diversity. The American Journal of Community Psychology publishes research, theory, and descriptions of innovative interventions on a wide range of topics, including, but not limited to: individual, family, peer, and community mental health, physical health, and substance use; risk and protective factors for health and well being; educational, legal, and work environment processes, policies, and opportunities; social ecological approaches, including the interplay of individual family, peer, institutional, neighborhood, and community processes; social welfare, social justice, and human rights; social problems and social change; program, system, and policy evaluations; and, understanding people within their social, cultural, economic, geographic, and historical contexts.