Lit@CEWS

Inhalt: Scientific literature has presented relevant evidence about the existence of gender violence in science and has evaluated some programs and actions against this problem. Although many researchers have identified the importance of those intervention programs to overcome this harassment, it is still a predominant reality in institutions, surrounded by the law of silence. Emerging lines of research are studying which of those programs are successful in this endeavor, and their transferability to other contexts. This research has analyzed one program: Programme of Women's Dialogic Action (ProWomenDialogue). To gather evidence for expressing whether or not ProWomenDialogue has an impact, and whether it constitutes a successful action against harassment, the SIOR (Social Impact Open Repository) criteria, emerging from the FP7 IMPACT-Project, have been used for the evaluation of this research's social impact. Drawing on SIOR, ProWomenDialogue shows unprecedented transformations in academia through six lines of action. The political impact led to legislation that made compulsory the creation of equality committees and protocols against sexual harassment. Social impact, aligned with SDG 5, inspires the reduction of GBV, while encouraging the career promotion of female researchers. ProWomenDialogue embodies a Successful Action platform against violence, presenting their features as recommendations to be implemented in other settings.

Schlagwörter:bystander intervention; Evaluation; isolation; Measure; sexual harassment; social implication; upstander; violence

CEWS Kategorie:Sexuelle Belästigung und Gewalt

Verfügbarkeit:https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148521

Dokumenttyp:Zeitschriftenaufsatz

Inhalt: Despite the high prevalence of adverse health and trauma-related outcomes associated with intimate partner violence (IPV), help-seeking and service utilization among survivors is low. This study is part of a larger mixed-methods and survivor-centered validation study on the Icelandic Barriers to Help-Seeking for Trauma (BHS-TR) scale, a new barriers measure focused on trauma recovery. A mixed-methods legitimation strategy of integration was employed to evaluate the BHS-TR structure in samples of IPV survivors. The merging of qualitative (n = 17) and quantitative (n = 137) data through a joint display analysis revealed mainly complementarity findings, strengthening the scale's overall trustworthiness and validity evidence. Divergent findings involved items about mistrust, perceived rejection, stigmatization, fearing vulnerability, and safeguarding efforts that were significant help-seeking barriers in the survivors' narratives, whereas factor analysis indicated their removal. These BHS-TR items were critically evaluated in an iterative spiraling process that supported the barriers' influence, illuminated core issues, and guided potential refinements. This work contributes to the growing field of mixed methods instrument validation placing equal status on qualitative and quantitative methods and emphasizing integration to provide more complete insights. Moreover, the study's findings highlight the added value of further exploring divergence between two sets of data and the importance of giving attention to the voices of the target population throughout the validation process.

Schlagwörter:Beschwerdestelle; disclosure; GBV; Gewalt gegen Frauen; Intervention; Maßnahmen; Opfer; scale; Skala; trauma; Validität; validity; victimization; violence; violence against women

CEWS Kategorie:Sexuelle Belästigung und Gewalt

Verfügbarkeit:https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074297

Dokumenttyp:Zeitschriftenaufsatz

Inhalt: Public helping reactions are essential to reduce a victim's secondary victimization in intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) cases. Because gender-related characteristics have been linked widely to IPVAW prevalence, the study aimed to examine individual attitudes and perceptions toward different forms of violence against women, as well as gender-related macrosocial ideological and structural factors, in explaining helping reactions to IPVAW across 28 European countries. We performed multilevel logistic regression analysis, taking measures from the Eurobarometer 2016 (N = 7115) and the European Institute for Gender Equality datasets. Our study revealed a greater individual perceived IPVAW prevalence, positive perception about the appropriateness of a legal response to psychological and sexual violence against women partners, and less VAW-supportive attitudes predicted helping reactions (i.e., formal, informal), but not negative reactions to IPVAW. Moreover, individuals from European countries with a greater perceived IPVAW prevalence and gender equality preferred formal reactions to IPVAW. Otherwise, in the European countries with lesser perceived IPVAW prevalence and negative perceptions about the appropriate legal response to psychological and sexual violence, people were more likely to provide informal reactions to IPVAW. Our results showed the role of gender-related characteristics influenced real reactions toward known victim of IPVAW.

Schlagwörter:cross-cultural comparison; gender equality; Intervention; intimate partner violence; Structural factor; victimization; violence against women

CEWS Kategorie:Sexuelle Belästigung und Gewalt

Verfügbarkeit:https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176314

Dokumenttyp:Zeitschriftenaufsatz