• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Study Title-Based Framing Effects on Reports of Sexual Violence and Associated Risk Factors in College Students.研究基于标题的框架效应对大学生中性暴力和相关风险因素报告的影响。
J Interpers Violence. 2022 Sep;37(17-18):NP15359-NP15383. doi: 10.1177/08862605211016349. Epub 2021 May 15.
2
Experiences of sexual assault and rape among college students with disabilities.残疾大学生的性侵犯和强奸经历。
J Am Coll Health. 2024 Apr;72(3):761-767. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2022.2057190. Epub 2022 Apr 5.
3
Sexual Assault Supportive Attitudes: Rape Myth Acceptance and Token Resistance in Greek and Non-Greek College Students From Two University Samples in the United States.性侵犯支持态度:美国两所大学的希腊裔和非希腊裔大学生中的强奸谬论接受和象征性抵制。
J Interpers Violence. 2018 Nov;33(22):3502-3530. doi: 10.1177/0886260516636064. Epub 2016 Mar 3.
4
Participant Acceptability of Questionnaires Impacts Sexual Victimization Prevalence Rates.参与者对问卷的接受程度会影响性侵犯发生率的统计结果。
J Child Sex Abus. 2023 Jul-Dec;32(6):771-789. doi: 10.1080/10538712.2023.2240778. Epub 2023 Aug 2.
5
Sexual Victimization and Mental Health in Female University Students.女大学生中的性侵害与心理健康
J Interpers Violence. 2022 Aug;37(15-16):NP14215-NP14238. doi: 10.1177/08862605211005148. Epub 2021 Apr 18.
6
Risk for dating violence and sexual assault over time: The role of college and prior experiences with violence.随着时间的推移,约会暴力和性侵犯的风险:大学和以前经历暴力的作用。
J Am Coll Health. 2023 Apr;71(3):973-979. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2021.1910273. Epub 2021 May 19.
7
Victimization and perpetration of sexual violence in college-aged men and women.大学年龄段男女遭受性暴力及实施性暴力的情况。
J Forensic Nurs. 2014 Jul-Sep;10(3):153-9. doi: 10.1097/JFN.0000000000000033.
8
Prevalence of and risk factors for sexual victimization in college women in Chile.智利大学女生性侵害的发生率及危险因素
Int Fam Plan Perspect. 2007 Dec;33(4):168-75. doi: 10.1363/ifpp.33.168.07.
9
Examining Women's Sexual Assault Victimization Experiences since Entering College via Two Behavioral Assessments.通过两项行为评估考察女性进入大学后的性侵犯受害经历。
J Sex Res. 2022 Jul;59(6):780-791. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2021.1994912. Epub 2021 Nov 17.
10
Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization--national intimate partner and sexual violence survey, United States, 2011.性暴力、跟踪和亲密伴侣暴力受害的流行率和特征——2011 年美国全国亲密伴侣和性暴力调查。
MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014 Sep 5;63(8):1-18.

引用本文的文献

1
Exploring Measurement Strategies for Identifying Multiple-Perpetrator Sexual Violence: Higher Prevalence Rates Than Past Research.探索识别多人实施的性暴力的测量策略:患病率高于以往研究。
Aggress Behav. 2025 Mar;51(2):e70021. doi: 10.1002/ab.70021.
2
An Experimental Test of the Impact of Varying Questionnaire Response Format on Prevalence Rates for Sexual Violence Victimization and Perpetration.一种变化的调查问卷回答格式对性暴力受害和加害发生率影响的实验测试。
J Interpers Violence. 2022 Dec;37(23-24):NP23541-NP23562. doi: 10.1177/08862605211064239. Epub 2021 Dec 24.

本文引用的文献

1
Test-Retest Reliabilities of Four Tactic-first Sexual Violence History Questionnaires.四种以策略为先的性暴力史调查问卷的重测信度
Psychol Violence. 2021 Nov;11(6):580-590. doi: 10.1037/vio0000384. Epub 2021 May 6.
2
The impact of sociocultural contexts on mental health following sexual violence: A conceptual model.性暴力后社会文化背景对心理健康的影响:一个概念模型。
Psychol Violence. 2021 Sep;11(5):476-487. doi: 10.1037/vio0000350.
3
The Assessment of Forced Penetration: A Necessary and Further Step Toward Understanding Men's Sexual Victimization and Women's Perpetration.强迫性插入行为的评估:迈向理解男性性受害及女性犯罪行为的必要且深入的一步。
J Contemp Crim Justice. 2020 Nov;36(4):480-498. doi: 10.1177/1043986220936108. Epub 2020 Jun 26.
4
The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis: A Case Study in Peripheral Trauma with Implications for Health Professionals.塔斯基吉未治疗梅毒研究:一个对健康专业人员有启示的周边创伤案例研究。
J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Jan;35(1):322-325. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05309-8. Epub 2019 Oct 23.
5
Advancing Theory, Methods, and Dissemination in Sexual Violence Research to Build a More Equitable Future: An Intersectional, Community-Engaged Approach.推进性暴力研究中的理论、方法与传播,构建更公平的未来:一种交叉性、社区参与式方法。
Violence Against Women. 2019 Dec;25(16):1906-1931. doi: 10.1177/1077801219875823. Epub 2019 Sep 17.
6
A Trauma-Informed Approach to Sexual Violence Research Ethics and Open Science.创伤知情方法在性暴力研究伦理和开放科学中的应用。
J Interpers Violence. 2019 Dec;34(23-24):4765-4793. doi: 10.1177/0886260519871530.
7
Can nonresponse bias and known methodological differences explain the large discrepancies in the reported prevalence rate of violence found in Swedish studies?在瑞典的研究中,报告的暴力发生率存在很大差异,这种差异能否用无应答偏差和已知的方法学差异来解释?
PLoS One. 2019 May 9;14(5):e0216451. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216451. eCollection 2019.
8
Semantic memories prime autobiographical memories: General implications and implications for everyday autobiographical remembering.语义记忆促进自传体记忆:一般意义及对日常自传体记忆的启示。
Mem Cognit. 2019 Feb;47(2):299-312. doi: 10.3758/s13421-018-0866-9.
9
An Empirical Exploration Into the Measurement of Rape Culture.对强奸文化测量的实证探索。
J Interpers Violence. 2021 Jan;36(1-2):NP70-NP95. doi: 10.1177/0886260517732347. Epub 2017 Sep 16.
10
Beware of the origin of numbers: Standard scoring of the SF-12 and SF-36 summary measures distorts measurement and score interpretations.注意数值的来源:SF-12和SF-36总结指标的标准评分会扭曲测量结果和分数解释。
Res Nurs Health. 2017 Aug;40(4):378-386. doi: 10.1002/nur.21806.

研究基于标题的框架效应对大学生中性暴力和相关风险因素报告的影响。

Study Title-Based Framing Effects on Reports of Sexual Violence and Associated Risk Factors in College Students.

机构信息

University of North Dakota, USA.

Kent State University, OH, USA.

出版信息

J Interpers Violence. 2022 Sep;37(17-18):NP15359-NP15383. doi: 10.1177/08862605211016349. Epub 2021 May 15.

DOI:10.1177/08862605211016349
PMID:33993779
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11484239/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

There are many methodological issues in studying sexual violence, including potential framing effects. Framing effects refer to how researchers communicate the purpose of a study to participants, such as, how the study is advertised or explained. The aim of this study was to investigate if framing effects were associated with differences in participants' self-reported experiences of sexual violence and related correlates.

METHODS

College students ( = 782) were recruited to participate in one of four identical studies that differed in the title: "Questionnaires about Alcohol," "Questionnaires about Crime," "Questionnaires about Health," or "Questionnaires about Sexual Assault." Participants chose one of the four studies and completed measures of sexual violence as well as attitudinal and behavioral measures in randomized order.

RESULTS

We found significantly more reports of childhood sexual abuse (33.6% vs. 18.5%), rape (33.9% vs. 21.1%), higher frequency of victimization ( = 11.35 vs. 5.44), and greater acknowledged rape for bisexual people (46.2% vs. 0.0%) in the sexual assault (SA) condition compared to other conditions. There were no differences in sexual violence perpetration or attitudinal or behavioral measures.

CONCLUSION

These results revealed that framing effects, based on the study title, affect outcomes in sexual victimization research. Rape was reported 1.6× more in the "Sexual Assault" condition than in the "Health" condition. It is unclear whether these framing effects reflect self-selection bias or framing related increased reports in the SA condition, suppression of reports in other conditions, or a combination thereof.

摘要

目的

性暴力研究存在许多方法学问题,包括潜在的框架效应。框架效应是指研究人员向参与者传达研究目的的方式,例如研究的宣传或解释方式。本研究旨在调查框架效应是否与参与者自我报告的性暴力经历和相关因素的差异有关。

方法

招募大学生(n=782)参加四项完全相同的研究之一,这些研究在标题上有所不同:“关于酒精的问卷”、“关于犯罪的问卷”、“关于健康的问卷”或“关于性侵犯的问卷”。参与者从这四个研究中选择一个,并以随机顺序完成性暴力以及态度和行为的测量。

结果

我们发现,在性侵犯(SA)条件下,报告的儿童期性虐待(33.6%比 18.5%)、强奸(33.9%比 21.1%)、更高的受害频率(=11.35 比 5.44)和双性恋者承认的强奸更多(46.2%比 0.0%)。在其他条件下,性暴力犯罪或态度和行为的测量没有差异。

结论

这些结果表明,基于研究标题的框架效应会影响性受害研究的结果。在“性侵犯”条件下报告的强奸比在“健康”条件下多 1.6 倍。目前尚不清楚这些框架效应是否反映了自我选择偏差,还是 SA 条件下的框架相关报告增加、其他条件下报告的抑制,或两者的结合。