难道就没有人再关心一下吗?

IF 1.5 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Maya Flax, Olivia Millband, Windy Grendele
{"title":"难道就没有人再关心一下吗?","authors":"Maya Flax, Olivia Millband, Windy Grendele","doi":"10.1177/02697580241271465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While previous studies have focused on bystander intervention, current understanding specifically in the area of bystander intervention to hate crime is limited. This study seeks to focus on bystander intervention to hate crime in the United Kingdom. This study utilised 10 semi-structure interviews with participants who had personally witnessed a hate crime incident, exploring reasons for intervention, or lack thereof. Results revealed that for some who intervened, the decision to do so often stemmed from an instinctive, impulsive place, whereas for others it was a calculative decision-making process. The findings also reveal that there are various factors which influence participants in deciding whether to intervene. Critically, while all factors were described as pivotal to influencing participants in choosing whether to intervene or remain bystanders, there was no hierarchy of factors which can be generalised. The study concludes that the decision to intervene is a complex multi-faceted process and promotes awareness-raising about the various options available when witnessing a hate crime.","PeriodicalId":45622,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Victimology","volume":"224 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Doesn’t anyone care anymore?’ – Bystander intervention to hate crime\",\"authors\":\"Maya Flax, Olivia Millband, Windy Grendele\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02697580241271465\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While previous studies have focused on bystander intervention, current understanding specifically in the area of bystander intervention to hate crime is limited. This study seeks to focus on bystander intervention to hate crime in the United Kingdom. This study utilised 10 semi-structure interviews with participants who had personally witnessed a hate crime incident, exploring reasons for intervention, or lack thereof. Results revealed that for some who intervened, the decision to do so often stemmed from an instinctive, impulsive place, whereas for others it was a calculative decision-making process. The findings also reveal that there are various factors which influence participants in deciding whether to intervene. Critically, while all factors were described as pivotal to influencing participants in choosing whether to intervene or remain bystanders, there was no hierarchy of factors which can be generalised. The study concludes that the decision to intervene is a complex multi-faceted process and promotes awareness-raising about the various options available when witnessing a hate crime.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45622,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Victimology\",\"volume\":\"224 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Victimology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02697580241271465\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Victimology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02697580241271465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然以往的研究侧重于旁观者干预,但目前对旁观者干预仇恨犯罪领域的具体了解还很有限。本研究旨在关注英国旁观者对仇恨犯罪的干预。本研究采用了 10 个半结构式访谈,访问了曾亲眼目睹仇恨犯罪事件的参与者,探讨了干预或不干预的原因。结果显示,对于一些干预者来说,这样做的决定往往源于本能的冲动,而对于其他人来说,则是一个深思熟虑的决策过程。研究结果还显示,有各种因素影响着参与者决定是否进行干预。重要的是,虽然所有因素都被描述为影响参与者选择干预还是袖手旁观的关键因素,但这些因素并没有等级之分,不能一概而论。研究得出结论,决定是否干预是一个复杂的多方面的过程,并提倡提高对目睹仇恨犯罪时的各种选择的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘Doesn’t anyone care anymore?’ – Bystander intervention to hate crime
While previous studies have focused on bystander intervention, current understanding specifically in the area of bystander intervention to hate crime is limited. This study seeks to focus on bystander intervention to hate crime in the United Kingdom. This study utilised 10 semi-structure interviews with participants who had personally witnessed a hate crime incident, exploring reasons for intervention, or lack thereof. Results revealed that for some who intervened, the decision to do so often stemmed from an instinctive, impulsive place, whereas for others it was a calculative decision-making process. The findings also reveal that there are various factors which influence participants in deciding whether to intervene. Critically, while all factors were described as pivotal to influencing participants in choosing whether to intervene or remain bystanders, there was no hierarchy of factors which can be generalised. The study concludes that the decision to intervene is a complex multi-faceted process and promotes awareness-raising about the various options available when witnessing a hate crime.
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
International Review of Victimology
International Review of Victimology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
30
×
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