FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3087383669> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3087383669 abstract "Although victim and perpetrator gender are proposed to influence legally relevant decision-making in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV), there is limited research into factors that may influence decision-making in ‘non-prototypical’ cases of IPV, such as that which occurs between same-sex partners. While research conducted in other contexts suggests that stereotypes about sexual orientation and gender-roles impact perceptions of others (Levahot & Lambert, 2007), the influence of these stereotypes on decision-making in same-sex IPV has not been widely considered. Rather, within the same-sex IPV literature it is suggested that characterisations of same-sex IPV are based on heterosexual gender stereotypes simply applied to same-sex partnerships (Terrance & Little, 2010). However, whether this is an accurate representation of these relationships has not been empirically evaluated. Further, it is unclear precisely how the application of these stereotypes impacts third-party perceptions of same-sex IPV. Research exploring the impact of gender stereotypes on the evaluation of same-sex IPV has produced inconsistent results (Russell & Kraus, 2016; Wasarhaley, et al., 2015). Given that the referral of IPV cases (as with other cases) through the legal system is based on beliefs about how others may perceive the case and evidence (Lievore, 2004), it is important to examine the extent to which stereotypes about gender and sexual orientation influence legal decisions in cases of same-sex IPV.This thesis draws on social psychological theories of stereotyping to investigate people's decision-making processes and legally-relevant judgements about same-sex IPV. Using a mixed- methods approach comprising qualitative and experimental studies, I draw on the cognitive optimiser approach to stereotyping (Macrae, et al., 1994), Role Congruity Theory (Eagly & Diekman, 2005) and Status Incongruity Hypothesis (SIH) (Moss-Racusin, et al., 2010), to first establish the stereotypes drawn on when making judgments about these kinds of cases, and then to examine how and why people respond negatively to victims of IPV who deviate from stereotypic gender expectations. Chapter 1 provides a general overview of the existing literature in the areas of same-sex IPV, and IPV more generally, and identifies the key theoretical constructs relevant to the current program of research. Chapter 2 reports two qualitative studies aimed at identifying the societal beliefs that exist about different-sex and same-sex relationships, without (N = 170) and with IPV (N =251). Results show that stereotypes about partners within same-sex relationships differ when viewed in the context of violence. In relationships without violence, the dominant stereotypes reflect gender inverse, gender typical, and heterosexual gender roles. However, in relationships with violence, the focus shifts to gender typical stereotypes, which appear to influence the perceived severity of the abuse. These findings suggest that examining the impact of gender typical stereotypes may provide clarity around how people perceive, and respond to, same-sex IPV.In Chapter 3 we present the first experimental study (N = 168), which draws on the cognitive optimiser approach to stereotyping (Macrae et al., 1994) to explore the role of gender- related stereotypes and strength of evidence on legally-relevant decision making in cases of same-sex IPV. The results of Chapter 3 show that, stereotypes associated with the victim and perpetrator's gender differentially impact perceptions of severity, guilt, and the stereotypicality of the violence. Specifically, male perpetrators are more likely to be viewed as guilty than female perpetrators. However, violence against men was perceived as less severe than violence against women, regardless of the gender of the perpetrator, or the type of violence perpetrated. These findings further highlight the importance of investigating the role of traditional gender stereotypes on perceptions of same-sex IPV.Chapter 4 details three experimental studies (N = 269, N = 934, N = 732) that replicate the finding that male victims of IPV are perceived more negatively that female victims of IPV, regardless of the perpetrator’s gender. I draw on Role Congruity Theory (Eagly & Diekman, 2005) and the SIH (Moss-Racusin, et al., 2010), to examine how and why people engage in ‘backlash’, -- that is, respond negatively to victims of IPV-- who deviate from stereotypic gender expectations. Chapter 4 demonstrates - for the first time - that backlash against male victims of IPV is a reaction to perceived threats to the gender hierarchy. Further, I find that those who more strongly endorse male role norms (i.e., cultural expectations and definitions of masculine behaviour) judge both male and female victims of IPV in same-sex relationships more negatively than those in different-sex relationships. Finally, Chapter 5 summarises the results of the program of research, discusses the findings in relation to the existing literature, and offers directions for further work in this area. The work presented in this thesis highlights the pivotal role that the endorsement of traditional gender-role beliefs play in the perception of, and responses to, same-sex IPV. This research provides a foundation from which methods to diminish the impact of these extra-legal beliefs in real-world cases can be developed." @default.
• W3087383669 created "2020-09-25" @default.
• W3087383669 creator A5058537808 @default.
• W3087383669 date "2020-09-08" @default.
• W3087383669 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W3087383669 title "The impact of gender stereotypes on perceptions of, and responses to, same-sex intimate partner violence" @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1271606292 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1513971332 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1521528383 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1539896512 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1819042414 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1911723154 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1964073511 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1965322605 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1966976587 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1969946766 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1973905993 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1978267759 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1979290264 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1980604727 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1983912405 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1984737313 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1986454729 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1987809944 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1989326565 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1991143664 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1991184540 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1993230832 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1993798548 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W1998443325 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2001104120 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2003543229 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2004956287 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2006876961 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2013510306 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2014385644 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2031880744 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2040527437 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2042459939 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2046702620 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2052966871 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2055814409 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2056479147 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2063131343 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2063249396 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2076818833 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2080829845 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2082617434 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2089014735 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2089358714 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2090238555 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2090762448 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2091757783 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2102521866 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2109891652 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2127629438 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2129872418 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2131404047 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2142386967 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2143140534 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2149997001 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2157491892 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2162813454 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2464173335 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2585292421 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2592574207 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2625117584 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2751888565 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2753192549 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W2788930055 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W3121431905 @default.
• W3087383669 cites W64581525 @default.
• W3087383669 doi "https://doi.org/10.14264/uql.2020.1034" @default.
• W3087383669 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3087383669 type Work @default.
• W3087383669 sameAs 3087383669 @default.
• W3087383669 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3087383669 crossrefType "dissertation" @default.
• W3087383669 hasAuthorship W3087383669A5058537808 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C138496976 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C26760741 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C2777997956 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C2778868352 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C2781403550 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C3017944768 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C526869908 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C542059537 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConceptScore W3087383669C11171543 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConceptScore W3087383669C138496976 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConceptScore W3087383669C15744967 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConceptScore W3087383669C169760540 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConceptScore W3087383669C26760741 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConceptScore W3087383669C2777997956 @default.
• W3087383669 hasConceptScore W3087383669C2778868352 @default.

• next