土耳其心理学教育中的学术自由与自我审查模式

Pub Date : 2024-05-28 DOI:10.1177/00986283241255605
Olga S. Hünler, Yudit Namer, N. Ekrem Düzen
{"title":"土耳其心理学教育中的学术自由与自我审查模式","authors":"Olga S. Hünler, Yudit Namer, N. Ekrem Düzen","doi":"10.1177/00986283241255605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundThe recent academic purge in Turkey eventuated by a twin wave starting in January 2016 was unprecedented. Two years of statutory rule after the July 2016 failed coup further damaged the rule of law. Even the legal authorities did not respect fundamental human rights. Psychology faculty had to keep a low profile to avoid further encroachments.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which psychology faculty discerned research and teaching-bound sociopolitical risks and exercised mitigation strategies.MethodSixty-three faculty responded to a questionnaire assessing risk appraisals and mitigation appeals countering threats to their research and teaching.ResultsFaculty remained inactive against high-risk appraisal in research and appealed to avoidance or vagueness when their risk appraisals were moderate. By contrast, avoidance was the primary strategy, compared to vagueness or inaction, in risk-bearing teaching.ConclusionFaculty try to cope with the adverse negative intellectual climate by being highly selective in their research and teaching. They appeal to differential strategies in either domain.Teaching ImplicationsResearch in risk apprehension and mitigation along with studies highlighting shared experiences may inform psychology departments on how to proceed under antagonistic circumstances.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Academic Freedom and Patterns of Self-Censorship in Psychology Education in Turkey\",\"authors\":\"Olga S. Hünler, Yudit Namer, N. Ekrem Düzen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00986283241255605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BackgroundThe recent academic purge in Turkey eventuated by a twin wave starting in January 2016 was unprecedented. Two years of statutory rule after the July 2016 failed coup further damaged the rule of law. Even the legal authorities did not respect fundamental human rights. Psychology faculty had to keep a low profile to avoid further encroachments.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which psychology faculty discerned research and teaching-bound sociopolitical risks and exercised mitigation strategies.MethodSixty-three faculty responded to a questionnaire assessing risk appraisals and mitigation appeals countering threats to their research and teaching.ResultsFaculty remained inactive against high-risk appraisal in research and appealed to avoidance or vagueness when their risk appraisals were moderate. By contrast, avoidance was the primary strategy, compared to vagueness or inaction, in risk-bearing teaching.ConclusionFaculty try to cope with the adverse negative intellectual climate by being highly selective in their research and teaching. They appeal to differential strategies in either domain.Teaching ImplicationsResearch in risk apprehension and mitigation along with studies highlighting shared experiences may inform psychology departments on how to proceed under antagonistic circumstances.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241255605\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241255605","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景土耳其最近由 2016 年 1 月开始的双重浪潮引发的学术清洗是史无前例的。2016 年 7 月政变失败后的两年法定统治进一步破坏了法治。即使是法律当局也不尊重基本人权。本研究旨在评估心理学教师对研究和教学所面临的社会政治风险的辨别程度,以及他们采取的缓解策略。方法63名教师回答了一份调查问卷,评估了他们的风险评估以及应对研究和教学所面临威胁的缓解策略。结论教师试图通过在研究和教学中的高度选择性来应对不利的负面知识氛围。教学启示有关风险规避和缓解的研究,以及强调共同经验的研究,可以为心理学系在对立环境下如何开展工作提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Academic Freedom and Patterns of Self-Censorship in Psychology Education in Turkey
BackgroundThe recent academic purge in Turkey eventuated by a twin wave starting in January 2016 was unprecedented. Two years of statutory rule after the July 2016 failed coup further damaged the rule of law. Even the legal authorities did not respect fundamental human rights. Psychology faculty had to keep a low profile to avoid further encroachments.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which psychology faculty discerned research and teaching-bound sociopolitical risks and exercised mitigation strategies.MethodSixty-three faculty responded to a questionnaire assessing risk appraisals and mitigation appeals countering threats to their research and teaching.ResultsFaculty remained inactive against high-risk appraisal in research and appealed to avoidance or vagueness when their risk appraisals were moderate. By contrast, avoidance was the primary strategy, compared to vagueness or inaction, in risk-bearing teaching.ConclusionFaculty try to cope with the adverse negative intellectual climate by being highly selective in their research and teaching. They appeal to differential strategies in either domain.Teaching ImplicationsResearch in risk apprehension and mitigation along with studies highlighting shared experiences may inform psychology departments on how to proceed under antagonistic circumstances.
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
×
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