Bystander Intervention in Intimate Partner Violence: A Scoping Review of Experiences and Outcomes.

IF 5.4 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Trauma Violence & Abuse Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1177/15248380231195886
Ella Kuskoff, Cameron Parsell
{"title":"Bystander Intervention in Intimate Partner Violence: A Scoping Review of Experiences and Outcomes.","authors":"Ella Kuskoff, Cameron Parsell","doi":"10.1177/15248380231195886","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Governments across the globe are increasingly implementing policies that encourage bystanders to prevent intimate partner violence (IPV) by intervening in violent or potentially violent situations. While a wealth of research examines the most effective mechanisms for increasing potential bystanders' feelings of self-efficacy and rates of intervention, there is significantly less evidence demonstrating how effective bystander intervention is at preventing or interrupting IPV. This article thus presents a scoping review of the literature examining the experiences and outcomes of bystander intervention in IPV. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, six databases were searched for relevant peer-reviewed studies published in English between 2001 and 2021. A total of 13 articles were ultimately included in the review. The review highlights that although current knowledge on the topic is highly limited, the combined findings of the studies indicate that immediate responses to bystander intervention are heavily context dependent: victims (and perpetrators) tend to react differently to bystander intervention depending on the type of intervention, the type of violence being used, and their relationship to the bystander. However, we have little to no understanding of the outcomes of bystander intervention, or how these outcomes might vary across different contexts. We argue that a more comprehensive understanding of the immediate and long-term implications of bystander intervention across different contexts is crucial if we are to maximize the effectiveness and minimize the potential for harm resulting from bystander interventions in IPV.</p>","PeriodicalId":54211,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","volume":" ","pages":"1799-1813"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11155209/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380231195886","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Governments across the globe are increasingly implementing policies that encourage bystanders to prevent intimate partner violence (IPV) by intervening in violent or potentially violent situations. While a wealth of research examines the most effective mechanisms for increasing potential bystanders' feelings of self-efficacy and rates of intervention, there is significantly less evidence demonstrating how effective bystander intervention is at preventing or interrupting IPV. This article thus presents a scoping review of the literature examining the experiences and outcomes of bystander intervention in IPV. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, six databases were searched for relevant peer-reviewed studies published in English between 2001 and 2021. A total of 13 articles were ultimately included in the review. The review highlights that although current knowledge on the topic is highly limited, the combined findings of the studies indicate that immediate responses to bystander intervention are heavily context dependent: victims (and perpetrators) tend to react differently to bystander intervention depending on the type of intervention, the type of violence being used, and their relationship to the bystander. However, we have little to no understanding of the outcomes of bystander intervention, or how these outcomes might vary across different contexts. We argue that a more comprehensive understanding of the immediate and long-term implications of bystander intervention across different contexts is crucial if we are to maximize the effectiveness and minimize the potential for harm resulting from bystander interventions in IPV.

亲密伴侣暴力中的旁观者干预:对经验和结果的范围审查。
全球各国政府正在越来越多地实施相关政策,鼓励旁观者通过干预暴力或潜在暴力情况来预防亲密伴侣间的暴力行为(IPV)。虽然有大量研究探讨了提高潜在旁观者自我效能感和干预率的最有效机制,但能证明旁观者干预在预防或阻止 IPV 方面有多大成效的证据却少得多。因此,本文对研究旁观者干预 IPV 的经验和结果的文献进行了范围界定综述。根据《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目》(扩展范围综述指南),我们在六个数据库中搜索了 2001 年至 2021 年间以英语发表的相关同行评审研究。最终共有 13 篇文章被纳入综述。综述强调,尽管目前关于该主题的知识非常有限,但研究结果综合表明,旁观者干预的即时反应在很大程度上取决于具体情况:受害者(和施暴者)对旁观者干预的反应往往不同,这取决于干预的类型、所使用暴力的类型以及他们与旁观者的关系。然而,我们对旁观者干预的结果,或者这些结果在不同情况下如何变化几乎一无所知。我们认为,如果我们要最大限度地提高旁观者干预 IPV 的效果并将其造成伤害的可能性降至最低,那么更全面地了解旁观者干预在不同情况下的直接和长期影响至关重要。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.60
自引率
7.80%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is devoted to organizing, synthesizing, and expanding knowledge on all force of trauma, abuse, and violence. This peer-reviewed journal is practitioner oriented and will publish only reviews of research, conceptual or theoretical articles, and law review articles. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is dedicated to professionals and advanced students in clinical training who work with any form of trauma, abuse, and violence. It is intended to compile knowledge that clearly affects practice, policy, and research.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信