农村社区制度背叛的定性探索:一种新兴的类型学。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-26 DOI:10.1080/15299732.2023.2195401
Sherry Hamby, Geoffrey Hervey, Jenna Land, Katie Schultz
{"title":"农村社区制度背叛的定性探索:一种新兴的类型学。","authors":"Sherry Hamby,&nbsp;Geoffrey Hervey,&nbsp;Jenna Land,&nbsp;Katie Schultz","doi":"10.1080/15299732.2023.2195401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To explore individuals' personal narratives of perceived betrayals and injustices committed by institutions, their representatives, or other authority figures and discern in what spheres of life they commonly manifest. 157 adults from largely rural, low-income communities in southern Appalachia participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews that asked them to describe key points in their life experiences, including high points, low points, and turning points. These were reviewed for episodes of institutional betrayals. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a grounded thematic analysis. Participants mentioned numerous instances of betrayals that occurred from interactions with institutions or their representatives. These were grouped into four categories: professional betrayals involving mistreatment from an employer, health care provider, or other authority figure; professional-organizational betrayals where a professional perpetrator was able to get support from a problematic organizational culture; corporate malfeasance involving misdeeds by business entities; and systemic injustices involving the sociopolitical architecture of society. The findings identified a range of institutional betrayal experiences that were unnecessary, unwanted, intentional, and harmful. They could be distinguished by the type of perpetrators and often led to notable harms, including unwanted system involvement and unemployment. Although participants seldom explicitly mentioned the rural setting in their descriptions of institutional betrayal, it is likely that limited options for health care providers, schools, and other institutions exacerbated some harms. Institutional betrayals need to be considered in people's <i>trauma dosage</i>, their cumulative lifetime burden of trauma.</p>","PeriodicalId":47476,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma & Dissociation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Qualitative Exploration of Institutional Betrayals in Rural Communities: An Emerging Typology.\",\"authors\":\"Sherry Hamby,&nbsp;Geoffrey Hervey,&nbsp;Jenna Land,&nbsp;Katie Schultz\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15299732.2023.2195401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To explore individuals' personal narratives of perceived betrayals and injustices committed by institutions, their representatives, or other authority figures and discern in what spheres of life they commonly manifest. 157 adults from largely rural, low-income communities in southern Appalachia participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews that asked them to describe key points in their life experiences, including high points, low points, and turning points. These were reviewed for episodes of institutional betrayals. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a grounded thematic analysis. Participants mentioned numerous instances of betrayals that occurred from interactions with institutions or their representatives. These were grouped into four categories: professional betrayals involving mistreatment from an employer, health care provider, or other authority figure; professional-organizational betrayals where a professional perpetrator was able to get support from a problematic organizational culture; corporate malfeasance involving misdeeds by business entities; and systemic injustices involving the sociopolitical architecture of society. The findings identified a range of institutional betrayal experiences that were unnecessary, unwanted, intentional, and harmful. They could be distinguished by the type of perpetrators and often led to notable harms, including unwanted system involvement and unemployment. Although participants seldom explicitly mentioned the rural setting in their descriptions of institutional betrayal, it is likely that limited options for health care providers, schools, and other institutions exacerbated some harms. Institutional betrayals need to be considered in people's <i>trauma dosage</i>, their cumulative lifetime burden of trauma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trauma & Dissociation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Trauma & Dissociation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2023.2195401\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma & Dissociation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2023.2195401","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

探索个人对机构、其代表或其他权威人物所犯下的背叛和不公正行为的个人叙述,并辨别他们通常在生活的哪些领域表现出来。157名来自阿巴拉契亚南部农村低收入社区的成年人参加了半结构化的定性访谈,要求他们描述生活经历中的关键点,包括高点、低点和转折点。审查了这些制度背叛事件。访谈记录采用有根据的主题分析法进行分析。与会者提到了在与机构或其代表的互动中发生的许多背叛事件。这些被分为四类:涉及雇主、医疗保健提供者或其他权威人物虐待的职业背叛;职业组织背叛,职业行为人能够从有问题的组织文化中获得支持;涉及商业实体不法行为的公司渎职行为;以及涉及社会政治结构的系统性不公正。研究结果发现了一系列不必要、不想要、故意和有害的制度背叛经历。他们可以通过犯罪者的类型来区分,并经常导致显著的伤害,包括不必要的系统参与和失业。尽管参与者在描述机构背叛时很少明确提到农村环境,但医疗保健提供者、学校和其他机构的有限选择可能加剧了一些危害。制度背叛需要在人们的创伤剂量,他们一生累积的创伤负担中加以考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Qualitative Exploration of Institutional Betrayals in Rural Communities: An Emerging Typology.

To explore individuals' personal narratives of perceived betrayals and injustices committed by institutions, their representatives, or other authority figures and discern in what spheres of life they commonly manifest. 157 adults from largely rural, low-income communities in southern Appalachia participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews that asked them to describe key points in their life experiences, including high points, low points, and turning points. These were reviewed for episodes of institutional betrayals. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a grounded thematic analysis. Participants mentioned numerous instances of betrayals that occurred from interactions with institutions or their representatives. These were grouped into four categories: professional betrayals involving mistreatment from an employer, health care provider, or other authority figure; professional-organizational betrayals where a professional perpetrator was able to get support from a problematic organizational culture; corporate malfeasance involving misdeeds by business entities; and systemic injustices involving the sociopolitical architecture of society. The findings identified a range of institutional betrayal experiences that were unnecessary, unwanted, intentional, and harmful. They could be distinguished by the type of perpetrators and often led to notable harms, including unwanted system involvement and unemployment. Although participants seldom explicitly mentioned the rural setting in their descriptions of institutional betrayal, it is likely that limited options for health care providers, schools, and other institutions exacerbated some harms. Institutional betrayals need to be considered in people's trauma dosage, their cumulative lifetime burden of trauma.

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
6.00
自引率
6.10%
发文量
39
×
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