男性如何评价和指责聚众滋扰的受害者?取决于受害者对女权主义或平等主义的认同。

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Interpersonal Violence Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-08 DOI:10.1177/08862605241235622
Ángel Sánchez-Rodríguez, Jesús López Megías
{"title":"男性如何评价和指责聚众滋扰的受害者?取决于受害者对女权主义或平等主义的认同。","authors":"Ángel Sánchez-Rodríguez, Jesús López Megías","doi":"10.1177/08862605241235622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the current research, our objective was to explore how men assess and assign blame to both a man and a woman who are victims of workplace mobbing, depending on whether they identify as feminist or egalitarian. It is well recognized that the label \"feminist\" carries distinct connotations when applied to individuals of different genders. However, it remains unclear whether these varied connotations are due to the label itself or its underlying meaning. Given that the feminist label has been traditionally stigmatized, we aimed to disentangle the influence of the label from its semantic content. To achieve this, we compared the evaluations and attributions of victim blame directed toward targets labeled as feminist with those labeled with a similar but more neutral term-that is, egalitarian-as well as with unlabeled targets. Considering that much of the previous research in this area has focused on samples predominantly composed of women, we aimed to investigate how men respond to these labels. Through three experiments involving male participants (<i>N</i> = 628), we presented fictitious scenarios depicting a man or a woman who were victims of workplace mobbing due to their identification as feminist or egalitarian. The key finding of our research is that the feminist label, rather than its semantic content, significantly influences the evaluations and assignment of blame expressed by men who strongly adhere to traditional male role norms. These findings underscore the importance of these labels (feminist and egalitarian) in social judgments, particularly when applied to victims of workplace mobbing.</p>","PeriodicalId":16289,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","volume":" ","pages":"4464-4488"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Do Men Evaluate and Blame Victims of Mobbing? Depending on the Victims' Identification as Feminist or Egalitarian.\",\"authors\":\"Ángel Sánchez-Rodríguez, Jesús López Megías\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08862605241235622\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the current research, our objective was to explore how men assess and assign blame to both a man and a woman who are victims of workplace mobbing, depending on whether they identify as feminist or egalitarian. It is well recognized that the label \\\"feminist\\\" carries distinct connotations when applied to individuals of different genders. However, it remains unclear whether these varied connotations are due to the label itself or its underlying meaning. Given that the feminist label has been traditionally stigmatized, we aimed to disentangle the influence of the label from its semantic content. To achieve this, we compared the evaluations and attributions of victim blame directed toward targets labeled as feminist with those labeled with a similar but more neutral term-that is, egalitarian-as well as with unlabeled targets. Considering that much of the previous research in this area has focused on samples predominantly composed of women, we aimed to investigate how men respond to these labels. Through three experiments involving male participants (<i>N</i> = 628), we presented fictitious scenarios depicting a man or a woman who were victims of workplace mobbing due to their identification as feminist or egalitarian. The key finding of our research is that the feminist label, rather than its semantic content, significantly influences the evaluations and assignment of blame expressed by men who strongly adhere to traditional male role norms. These findings underscore the importance of these labels (feminist and egalitarian) in social judgments, particularly when applied to victims of workplace mobbing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interpersonal Violence\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"4464-4488\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"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/10.1177/08862605241235622\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241235622","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在当前的研究中,我们的目标是探讨男性如何评估工作场所聚众滋扰的男性和女性受害者,并根据他们是否认同为女权主义者或平等主义者,对他们进行指责。众所周知,"女权主义者 "这一标签在应用于不同性别的个人时具有不同的内涵。然而,这些不同的内涵是由标签本身还是其潜在含义造成的,目前仍不清楚。鉴于女权主义者的标签历来被污名化,我们的目标是将该标签的影响与其语义内容区分开来。为此,我们比较了被贴上女权标签的对象与被贴上类似但更中性的标签(即平等主义)的对象以及未被贴标签的对象对受害者的评价和归咎。考虑到之前这方面的研究主要集中在女性样本上,我们的目标是调查男性对这些标签的反应。通过三个男性参与者(人数= 628)参与的实验,我们呈现了一个虚构的场景,描述了一名男性或一名女性由于被认定为女权主义者或平等主义者而成为职场暴徒的受害者。我们研究的主要发现是,女权主义者的标签,而不是其语义内容,会极大地影响那些恪守传统男性角色规范的男性对受害者的评价和指责。这些发现强调了这些标签(女权主义者和平等主义者)在社会判断中的重要性,尤其是在适用于工作场所聚众滋扰的受害者时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How Do Men Evaluate and Blame Victims of Mobbing? Depending on the Victims' Identification as Feminist or Egalitarian.

In the current research, our objective was to explore how men assess and assign blame to both a man and a woman who are victims of workplace mobbing, depending on whether they identify as feminist or egalitarian. It is well recognized that the label "feminist" carries distinct connotations when applied to individuals of different genders. However, it remains unclear whether these varied connotations are due to the label itself or its underlying meaning. Given that the feminist label has been traditionally stigmatized, we aimed to disentangle the influence of the label from its semantic content. To achieve this, we compared the evaluations and attributions of victim blame directed toward targets labeled as feminist with those labeled with a similar but more neutral term-that is, egalitarian-as well as with unlabeled targets. Considering that much of the previous research in this area has focused on samples predominantly composed of women, we aimed to investigate how men respond to these labels. Through three experiments involving male participants (N = 628), we presented fictitious scenarios depicting a man or a woman who were victims of workplace mobbing due to their identification as feminist or egalitarian. The key finding of our research is that the feminist label, rather than its semantic content, significantly influences the evaluations and assignment of blame expressed by men who strongly adhere to traditional male role norms. These findings underscore the importance of these labels (feminist and egalitarian) in social judgments, particularly when applied to victims of workplace mobbing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
12.00%
发文量
375
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.
期刊最新文献
Role of Maternal Adverse Childhood Experiences on Infant Neglect: A Multi-Perspective Approach. Emerging Trends in Intimate Partner Rape and Marital/Spousal Rape During the Biennium 2020 and 2021, Including the COVID-19 Pandemic in Greece. The Spatial Scale and Spread of Child Victimization. When Is Teasing Abuse? A Grounded Theory of Teasing Among Mexican American Adolescent Dating Couples. Co-Existence Patterns of Social Norms and Positive Defending Intention Among Adolescents as School Bullying Bystanders.
×
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