社区利益相关者对犯罪和受害的看法:理解农村中心地带集体效能和社会凝聚力的混合方法

Ashley Lockwood, April N. Terry
{"title":"社区利益相关者对犯罪和受害的看法:理解农村中心地带集体效能和社会凝聚力的混合方法","authors":"Ashley Lockwood, April N. Terry","doi":"10.18061/ijrc.v6i1.8629","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous criminological literature has mostly neglected rural communities, often treating these places as smaller pieces of urban culture. Literature suggests rural communities operate differently than urban neighborhoods, with distinctive values, norms, and community cohesion. For example, concepts surrounding collective efficacy may work counterproductively in rural areas—further exploiting outed community members within \"close-knit\" environments. The current study sought to compare perceptions of collective efficacy and social cohesion, crime, and victimization between rural and urban counties across one Midwestern rural state. Using a mixed-methods approach, community stakeholders from a variety of professions were surveyed. Quantitative results suggest similar perceptions of collective efficacy and social cohesion in rural and urban communities while qualitative responses paint a much different picture—an image of rural communities \"minding their own business\" and both formally and informally intervening only in the most extreme and personalized scenarios.","PeriodicalId":93767,"journal":{"name":"International journal of rural criminology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Community stakeholders' perceptions of crime and victimization: A mixed-methods approach to understanding collective efficacy and social cohesion in the rural heartland\",\"authors\":\"Ashley Lockwood, April N. Terry\",\"doi\":\"10.18061/ijrc.v6i1.8629\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous criminological literature has mostly neglected rural communities, often treating these places as smaller pieces of urban culture. Literature suggests rural communities operate differently than urban neighborhoods, with distinctive values, norms, and community cohesion. For example, concepts surrounding collective efficacy may work counterproductively in rural areas—further exploiting outed community members within \\\"close-knit\\\" environments. The current study sought to compare perceptions of collective efficacy and social cohesion, crime, and victimization between rural and urban counties across one Midwestern rural state. Using a mixed-methods approach, community stakeholders from a variety of professions were surveyed. Quantitative results suggest similar perceptions of collective efficacy and social cohesion in rural and urban communities while qualitative responses paint a much different picture—an image of rural communities \\\"minding their own business\\\" and both formally and informally intervening only in the most extreme and personalized scenarios.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of rural criminology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of rural criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18061/ijrc.v6i1.8629\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of rural criminology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18061/ijrc.v6i1.8629","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

以前的犯罪学文献大多忽视了农村社区,往往将这些地方视为城市文化的一小部分。文献表明,农村社区的运作方式与城市社区不同,具有独特的价值观、规范和社区凝聚力。例如,围绕集体效能的概念可能在农村地区产生反作用——在“紧密联系”的环境中进一步利用暴露的社区成员。目前的研究试图比较中西部一个农村州农村和城市县对集体效能和社会凝聚力、犯罪和受害情况的看法。采用混合方法,对来自各种职业的社区利益相关者进行了调查。定量结果表明,农村和城市社区对集体效能和社会凝聚力的看法相似,而定性反应则描绘了一幅截然不同的画面——农村社区“只顾自己的事”,正式和非正式地只在最极端和个性化的情况下进行干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Community stakeholders' perceptions of crime and victimization: A mixed-methods approach to understanding collective efficacy and social cohesion in the rural heartland
Previous criminological literature has mostly neglected rural communities, often treating these places as smaller pieces of urban culture. Literature suggests rural communities operate differently than urban neighborhoods, with distinctive values, norms, and community cohesion. For example, concepts surrounding collective efficacy may work counterproductively in rural areas—further exploiting outed community members within "close-knit" environments. The current study sought to compare perceptions of collective efficacy and social cohesion, crime, and victimization between rural and urban counties across one Midwestern rural state. Using a mixed-methods approach, community stakeholders from a variety of professions were surveyed. Quantitative results suggest similar perceptions of collective efficacy and social cohesion in rural and urban communities while qualitative responses paint a much different picture—an image of rural communities "minding their own business" and both formally and informally intervening only in the most extreme and personalized scenarios.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信