Follingstad Diane R, Helff Cynthia M, Binford Robin V, Runge Margaret M, White Jeffrey D
Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, USA.
J Interpers Violence. 2004 Aug;19(8):916-42. doi: 10.1177/0886260504266229.
Literature assessing knowledge of and attitudes toward social issues has demonstrated that mental health professionals and lay persons often differ greatly. To add to the normative information in the field of psychological abuse and to determine whether the differences previously found between mental health professionals and lay persons extend to this field, a sample from each group rated psychologically aggressive items by a husband toward his wife. For the 102 items, psychologists were more likely to label the behaviors as "psychological abuse," but this tendency was due to psychologists considering the behaviors as either "always" or "possibly" abusive, whereas lay persons demonstrated a bimodal response pattern of rating the behaviors as "always" or "never" psychological abuse. Lay persons were much more likely than psychologists to rate items high in terms of severity level, however. The two groups used different contextual factors for determining that a behavior was psychological abuse when they initially were uncertain that it was abusive.
评估对社会问题的认知和态度的文献表明,心理健康专业人员和非专业人员往往存在很大差异。为了补充心理虐待领域的规范性信息,并确定先前在心理健康专业人员和非专业人员之间发现的差异是否也适用于该领域,我们从每组中抽取了一个样本,让他们对丈夫对妻子的心理攻击性项目进行评分。对于这102个项目,心理学家更倾向于将这些行为标记为“心理虐待”,但这种倾向是因为心理学家认为这些行为“总是”或“可能”具有虐待性,而非专业人员则表现出一种双峰反应模式,即将这些行为评为“总是”或“从不”属于心理虐待。然而,非专业人员比心理学家更有可能将项目评为严重程度较高。当两组最初不确定某种行为是否具有虐待性时,他们使用不同的背景因素来确定该行为是否为心理虐待。