Attorneys, tell your clients to think before they post: Social media data may influence how evaluators view their parental fitness

IF 0.6 Q4 FAMILY STUDIES
Ashley C. T. Jones, Ashley B. Batastini, Michael J. Vitacco, Rheanna L. Standridge, Sean B. Knuth
{"title":"Attorneys, tell your clients to think before they post: Social media data may influence how evaluators view their parental fitness","authors":"Ashley C. T. Jones,&nbsp;Ashley B. Batastini,&nbsp;Michael J. Vitacco,&nbsp;Rheanna L. Standridge,&nbsp;Sean B. Knuth","doi":"10.1111/fcre.12736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Information from social media is used in evaluations of parental fitness with some regularity. Yet, research is lacking on perceptions of this information and no research has examined how social media data impacts forensic evaluators' opinions related to parental fitness. This study compared forensic evaluators' perceptions of data trustworthiness, usefulness, and initial opinion of parental fitness in a fictitious case in which parental fitness was questioned. Perceptions of a parent's behavior were compared across two types of data in which it was presented (an Instagram post or a medical record note) and across genders of the parent (mother or father) being hypothetically evaluated. As hypothesized, information documented on social media was viewed more critically than information documented by a healthcare provider. Further, information primarily referencing the father in the case was viewed as less trustworthy than information referencing the mother, which appeared influenced by evaluators' identified self-reported sexist attitudes. Results suggest that family law attorneys, regardless of which parent they are representing, should advise their clients of the risks to using social media.</p>","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"61 3","pages":"545-562"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Court Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fcre.12736","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Information from social media is used in evaluations of parental fitness with some regularity. Yet, research is lacking on perceptions of this information and no research has examined how social media data impacts forensic evaluators' opinions related to parental fitness. This study compared forensic evaluators' perceptions of data trustworthiness, usefulness, and initial opinion of parental fitness in a fictitious case in which parental fitness was questioned. Perceptions of a parent's behavior were compared across two types of data in which it was presented (an Instagram post or a medical record note) and across genders of the parent (mother or father) being hypothetically evaluated. As hypothesized, information documented on social media was viewed more critically than information documented by a healthcare provider. Further, information primarily referencing the father in the case was viewed as less trustworthy than information referencing the mother, which appeared influenced by evaluators' identified self-reported sexist attitudes. Results suggest that family law attorneys, regardless of which parent they are representing, should advise their clients of the risks to using social media.

律师们,告诉你的客户在发帖前要三思:社交媒体数据可能会影响评估者对父母健康状况的看法
来自社交媒体的信息有一定规律地用于评估父母的适合度。然而,缺乏对这些信息的认知的研究,也没有研究调查社交媒体数据如何影响法医评估人员对父母健康的看法。本研究比较了法医评估人员的数据可信度,有用性的看法,并在一个虚构的情况下,父母的适合度被质疑父母的初始意见。对父母行为的看法通过两种类型的数据(Instagram帖子或医疗记录)进行比较,并对父母的性别(母亲或父亲)进行假设评估。正如假设的那样,人们对社交媒体上记录的信息的看法比医疗保健提供者记录的信息更为挑剔。此外,在这种情况下,主要涉及父亲的信息被认为比涉及母亲的信息更不可信,这似乎受到评估者自我报告的性别歧视态度的影响。结果表明,家庭法律师,无论他们代表哪一方的父母,都应该告诉他们的客户使用社交媒体的风险。
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
1.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
57
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信