增加获取途径和透明度:评估苏格兰法律诉讼中为强奸受害者-幸存者提供的记录誊本

IF 2.1 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Emma Richardson
{"title":"增加获取途径和透明度:评估苏格兰法律诉讼中为强奸受害者-幸存者提供的记录誊本","authors":"Emma Richardson","doi":"10.1108/jcp-03-2024-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to provide a viewpoint in response to the Scottish Government announcing a yearlong pilot scheme to make court transcripts available to complainants of rape who have had their case heard in the High Court. This is the outcome of a campaign led by survivors to make accessible records of their trial. Here, a five-question model is applied which cautions the use of written records of spoken interaction by asking, how adequate are they for the purpose intended to serve?\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nFive questions are asked of transcripts, or written records, from a previously developed model (Richardson et al., 2022): (i) Are they an accurate representation of the spoken interaction that took place?; (ii) Who has agency, whose “voice” is represented in the recorded account?; (iii) Do lay and professional parties have ownership over the record?; (iv) How usable is the record; and (v) How resource efficient it is to produce?\n\n\nFindings\nThe application of these questions to the yearlong pilot scheme offers a view on how transcripts, as written records of spoken interaction, must be considered not as direct replicas of the interaction that took place, but as a subjective text created by professional parties. In making these available, ownership is significantly increased. However, whether they are adequate for the purpose they intend to serve is yet to be known.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe originality of this viewpoint is offering a framework in which to locate some of the potential considerations by which to evaluate the pilot scheme. In considering how “high” or “low” answers to the five questions might “score” and recognising that as the scheme develops these issues intersect, consequences may be predicted by what is already known. For example, by increasing resource efficiency, you might decrease accuracy of representation and vice versa.\n","PeriodicalId":44013,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Increasing access and transparency: evaluating transcript provision for rape victim-survivors in Scottish legal proceedings\",\"authors\":\"Emma Richardson\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jcp-03-2024-0026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this paper is to provide a viewpoint in response to the Scottish Government announcing a yearlong pilot scheme to make court transcripts available to complainants of rape who have had their case heard in the High Court. This is the outcome of a campaign led by survivors to make accessible records of their trial. Here, a five-question model is applied which cautions the use of written records of spoken interaction by asking, how adequate are they for the purpose intended to serve?\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nFive questions are asked of transcripts, or written records, from a previously developed model (Richardson et al., 2022): (i) Are they an accurate representation of the spoken interaction that took place?; (ii) Who has agency, whose “voice” is represented in the recorded account?; (iii) Do lay and professional parties have ownership over the record?; (iv) How usable is the record; and (v) How resource efficient it is to produce?\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe application of these questions to the yearlong pilot scheme offers a view on how transcripts, as written records of spoken interaction, must be considered not as direct replicas of the interaction that took place, but as a subjective text created by professional parties. In making these available, ownership is significantly increased. However, whether they are adequate for the purpose they intend to serve is yet to be known.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe originality of this viewpoint is offering a framework in which to locate some of the potential considerations by which to evaluate the pilot scheme. In considering how “high” or “low” answers to the five questions might “score” and recognising that as the scheme develops these issues intersect, consequences may be predicted by what is already known. For example, by increasing resource efficiency, you might decrease accuracy of representation and vice versa.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":44013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Criminal Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Criminal Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcp-03-2024-0026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminal Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcp-03-2024-0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 本文旨在针对苏格兰政府宣布的一项为期一年的试点计划,即向在高等法院审理案件的强奸案申诉人提供法庭记录誊本,提出自己的观点。这是由幸存者领导的一场运动的成果,这场运动的目的是让人们能够获取他们的审判记录。设计/方法/途径根据之前开发的模型(Richardson et al、(ii)谁有代理权,谁的 "声音 "在记录中得到体现?(iii)非专业和专业人员对记录是否拥有所有权?研究结果将这些问题应用于为期一年的试点计划提供了一种观点,即作为口语互动的书面记录,记录誊本必须被视为不是所发生互动的直接复制品,而是由专业人员创作的主观文本。在提供这些记录的过程中,所有权得到了极大的加强。原创性/价值这一观点的原创性在于提供了一个框架,在这个框架中可以找到一些评估试点计划的潜在考虑因素。在考虑五个问题的 "高分 "或 "低分 "时,并认识到随着计划的发展,这些问题会相互交叉,因此可以根据已知情况预测后果。例如,通过提高资源效率,可能会降低表述的准确性,反之亦然。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Increasing access and transparency: evaluating transcript provision for rape victim-survivors in Scottish legal proceedings
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a viewpoint in response to the Scottish Government announcing a yearlong pilot scheme to make court transcripts available to complainants of rape who have had their case heard in the High Court. This is the outcome of a campaign led by survivors to make accessible records of their trial. Here, a five-question model is applied which cautions the use of written records of spoken interaction by asking, how adequate are they for the purpose intended to serve? Design/methodology/approach Five questions are asked of transcripts, or written records, from a previously developed model (Richardson et al., 2022): (i) Are they an accurate representation of the spoken interaction that took place?; (ii) Who has agency, whose “voice” is represented in the recorded account?; (iii) Do lay and professional parties have ownership over the record?; (iv) How usable is the record; and (v) How resource efficient it is to produce? Findings The application of these questions to the yearlong pilot scheme offers a view on how transcripts, as written records of spoken interaction, must be considered not as direct replicas of the interaction that took place, but as a subjective text created by professional parties. In making these available, ownership is significantly increased. However, whether they are adequate for the purpose they intend to serve is yet to be known. Originality/value The originality of this viewpoint is offering a framework in which to locate some of the potential considerations by which to evaluate the pilot scheme. In considering how “high” or “low” answers to the five questions might “score” and recognising that as the scheme develops these issues intersect, consequences may be predicted by what is already known. For example, by increasing resource efficiency, you might decrease accuracy of representation and vice versa.
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
Journal of Criminal Psychology
Journal of Criminal Psychology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
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