性别暴力研究中的组织偏见

IF 1.8 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Social Currents Pub Date : 2022-06-28 DOI:10.1177/23294965221111339
Benjamin R. Weiss, M. Shulman
{"title":"性别暴力研究中的组织偏见","authors":"Benjamin R. Weiss, M. Shulman","doi":"10.1177/23294965221111339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Relatively few victims of gender-based violence (GBV) seek help from nonprofit organizations, healthcare providers, or law enforcement agencies, choosing instead to disclose to friends and family or to nobody at all. This article presents a systematic review of GBV research in sociology showing that, despite low rates of formal service utilization, 68% of published articles use data from organizations including social service providers, hospitals, and police stations and courts. While data from organizations are essential for understanding the experiences of people who report to them, they may not be generalizable to victims broadly. Victims who seek formal help may differ from those who do not in their relative social advantage—along lines of race, socioeconomic status, gender identity, and more—and in their understandings of and responses to violence. We discuss how more non-organizational research might broaden our understanding of violence experienced by society’s most marginalized, elucidate ways to make formal organizational responses more inclusive, and sensitize stakeholders in the anti-GBV movement to interventions outside of the therapeutic and carceral state.","PeriodicalId":44139,"journal":{"name":"Social Currents","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Organizational Bias in Gender-Based Violence Research\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin R. Weiss, M. Shulman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23294965221111339\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Relatively few victims of gender-based violence (GBV) seek help from nonprofit organizations, healthcare providers, or law enforcement agencies, choosing instead to disclose to friends and family or to nobody at all. This article presents a systematic review of GBV research in sociology showing that, despite low rates of formal service utilization, 68% of published articles use data from organizations including social service providers, hospitals, and police stations and courts. While data from organizations are essential for understanding the experiences of people who report to them, they may not be generalizable to victims broadly. Victims who seek formal help may differ from those who do not in their relative social advantage—along lines of race, socioeconomic status, gender identity, and more—and in their understandings of and responses to violence. We discuss how more non-organizational research might broaden our understanding of violence experienced by society’s most marginalized, elucidate ways to make formal organizational responses more inclusive, and sensitize stakeholders in the anti-GBV movement to interventions outside of the therapeutic and carceral state.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Currents\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Currents\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965221111339\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Currents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965221111339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

相对而言,很少有性别暴力的受害者向非营利组织、医疗服务提供者或执法机构寻求帮助,而是选择向朋友和家人或根本不向任何人透露。本文对社会学中的性别暴力研究进行了系统回顾,结果表明,尽管正式服务使用率较低,但68%的已发表文章使用了来自社会服务提供者、医院、警察局和法院等组织的数据。虽然来自组织的数据对于了解向他们报告的人的经历至关重要,但这些数据可能无法广泛地推广到受害者。寻求正式帮助的受害者与不寻求正式帮助的受害者可能在相对的社会优势方面有所不同——比如种族、社会经济地位、性别认同等等——以及他们对暴力的理解和反应。我们讨论了更多的非组织研究如何扩大我们对社会最边缘化群体所经历的暴力的理解,阐明了使正式的组织反应更具包容性的方法,并使反gbv运动中的利益相关者对治疗和治疗状态之外的干预更加敏感。
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
Organizational Bias in Gender-Based Violence Research
Relatively few victims of gender-based violence (GBV) seek help from nonprofit organizations, healthcare providers, or law enforcement agencies, choosing instead to disclose to friends and family or to nobody at all. This article presents a systematic review of GBV research in sociology showing that, despite low rates of formal service utilization, 68% of published articles use data from organizations including social service providers, hospitals, and police stations and courts. While data from organizations are essential for understanding the experiences of people who report to them, they may not be generalizable to victims broadly. Victims who seek formal help may differ from those who do not in their relative social advantage—along lines of race, socioeconomic status, gender identity, and more—and in their understandings of and responses to violence. We discuss how more non-organizational research might broaden our understanding of violence experienced by society’s most marginalized, elucidate ways to make formal organizational responses more inclusive, and sensitize stakeholders in the anti-GBV movement to interventions outside of the therapeutic and carceral state.
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
Social Currents
Social Currents SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Social Currents, the official journal of the Southern Sociological Society, is a broad-ranging social science journal that focuses on cutting-edge research from all methodological and theoretical orientations with implications for national and international sociological communities. The uniqueness of Social Currents lies in its format. The front end of every issue is devoted to short, theoretical, agenda-setting contributions and brief, empirical and policy-related pieces. The back end of every issue includes standard journal articles that cover topics within specific subfields of sociology, as well as across the social sciences more broadly.
期刊最新文献
Coming Out Queer: Sexual and Romantic Exploration and Identity Development of LGBQ+ College Students Returning from Prison to a Changed City: How Does Gentrification Shape the Employment and Housing Opportunities of Returning Citizens? Fight the Power? How Black Adults’ Racial Capital Associates With Their Political Activities Rent Burden and Demographic Change Among Veterans: A Research Brief “A Future for White Children”: Examining Family Ideologies of White Extremist Groups at the Intersection of Race and Gender
×
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