对两种大学性侵犯强制报告政策方法的支持的混合方法检验

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Kathryn J. Holland, Rebecca L. Howard Valdivia, Molly C. Driessen
{"title":"对两种大学性侵犯强制报告政策方法的支持的混合方法检验","authors":"Kathryn J. Holland,&nbsp;Rebecca L. Howard Valdivia,&nbsp;Molly C. Driessen","doi":"10.1111/asap.70008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A <i>compelled disclosure</i> mandatory reporting policy approach requires all or nearly all university employees to report any sexual assault they learn about to university officials, regardless of the victim/survivor's wishes. Although rare, some universities have implemented policies that require the victim/survivor's consent to the report (i.e., <i>consented disclosure</i>). This mixed method study examined support for a <i>compelled disclosure</i> versus <i>consented disclosure</i> policy approach in a sample of college students (<i>n</i> = 640) and non-student adults (<i>n</i> = 405). Quantitative data examined whether sexual victimization and trust in university response to sexual assault reports were associated with policy preference. Qualitative data examined participants’ explanations for their policy preference. Most participants preferred <i>consented</i> over <i>compelled disclosure</i>, and college students and those with less trust in university response to reports were especially likely to support <i>consented disclosure</i>. Reasons for supporting <i>consented disclosure</i> predominantly centered on survivors, focusing on the importance of survivor choice and wellbeing. Those who supported <i>compelled disclosure</i> predominantly focused on individuals other than the survivor (e.g., the perpetrator, other students), personal beliefs about crime and punishment, and assumptions about the benefits of <i>compelled disclosure</i>. Findings highlight the importance of including a greater diversity of perspectives in mandatory reporting policy development.</p>","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/asap.70008","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A mixed method examination of support for two college sexual assault mandatory reporting policy approaches\",\"authors\":\"Kathryn J. Holland,&nbsp;Rebecca L. Howard Valdivia,&nbsp;Molly C. Driessen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/asap.70008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>A <i>compelled disclosure</i> mandatory reporting policy approach requires all or nearly all university employees to report any sexual assault they learn about to university officials, regardless of the victim/survivor's wishes. Although rare, some universities have implemented policies that require the victim/survivor's consent to the report (i.e., <i>consented disclosure</i>). This mixed method study examined support for a <i>compelled disclosure</i> versus <i>consented disclosure</i> policy approach in a sample of college students (<i>n</i> = 640) and non-student adults (<i>n</i> = 405). Quantitative data examined whether sexual victimization and trust in university response to sexual assault reports were associated with policy preference. Qualitative data examined participants’ explanations for their policy preference. Most participants preferred <i>consented</i> over <i>compelled disclosure</i>, and college students and those with less trust in university response to reports were especially likely to support <i>consented disclosure</i>. Reasons for supporting <i>consented disclosure</i> predominantly centered on survivors, focusing on the importance of survivor choice and wellbeing. Those who supported <i>compelled disclosure</i> predominantly focused on individuals other than the survivor (e.g., the perpetrator, other students), personal beliefs about crime and punishment, and assumptions about the benefits of <i>compelled disclosure</i>. Findings highlight the importance of including a greater diversity of perspectives in mandatory reporting policy development.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/asap.70008\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.70008\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.70008","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

强制披露强制报告政策方法要求所有或几乎所有大学员工向大学官员报告他们了解到的任何性侵犯,无论受害者/幸存者的意愿如何。虽然很少,但一些大学已经实施了要求受害者/幸存者同意报告的政策(即同意披露)。这项混合方法研究在大学生(n = 640)和非学生成年人(n = 405)的样本中检验了对强制披露与同意披露政策方法的支持程度。定量数据检验了性受害者和大学对性侵犯报告的信任度是否与政策偏好有关。定性数据检验了参与者对其政策偏好的解释。大多数参与者更倾向于同意而不是被迫披露,大学生和那些对大学对报告的反应不太信任的人尤其可能支持同意披露。支持同意披露的原因主要集中在幸存者身上,关注幸存者选择和福祉的重要性。那些支持强迫披露的人主要关注幸存者以外的个人(例如,犯罪者,其他学生),关于犯罪和惩罚的个人信念,以及关于强迫披露的好处的假设。调查结果强调了在制定强制性报告政策时纳入更多不同观点的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A mixed method examination of support for two college sexual assault mandatory reporting policy approaches

A compelled disclosure mandatory reporting policy approach requires all or nearly all university employees to report any sexual assault they learn about to university officials, regardless of the victim/survivor's wishes. Although rare, some universities have implemented policies that require the victim/survivor's consent to the report (i.e., consented disclosure). This mixed method study examined support for a compelled disclosure versus consented disclosure policy approach in a sample of college students (n = 640) and non-student adults (n = 405). Quantitative data examined whether sexual victimization and trust in university response to sexual assault reports were associated with policy preference. Qualitative data examined participants’ explanations for their policy preference. Most participants preferred consented over compelled disclosure, and college students and those with less trust in university response to reports were especially likely to support consented disclosure. Reasons for supporting consented disclosure predominantly centered on survivors, focusing on the importance of survivor choice and wellbeing. Those who supported compelled disclosure predominantly focused on individuals other than the survivor (e.g., the perpetrator, other students), personal beliefs about crime and punishment, and assumptions about the benefits of compelled disclosure. Findings highlight the importance of including a greater diversity of perspectives in mandatory reporting policy development.

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
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Recent articles in ASAP have examined social psychological methods in the study of economic and social justice including ageism, heterosexism, racism, sexism, status quo bias and other forms of discrimination, social problems such as climate change, extremism, homelessness, inter-group conflict, natural disasters, poverty, and terrorism, and social ideals such as democracy, empowerment, equality, health, and trust.
×
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