English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
EndNote (UTF-8)
 
DownloadE-Mail
  Reactive guardianship: Who intervenes? How? And why?

Barnum, T., Herman, S., Van Gelder, J.-L., Ribeaud, D., Eisner, M., & Nagin, D. S. (2024). Reactive guardianship: Who intervenes? How? And why? Criminology. doi:10.1111/1745-9125.12380.

Item is

Files

hide Files
:
Criminology - 2024 - Barnum - Reactive guardianship Who intervenes How And why.pdf (Any fulltext), 910KB
Name:
Criminology - 2024 - Barnum - Reactive guardianship Who intervenes How And why.pdf
Description:
-
OA-Status:
Not specified
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-

Locators

show

Creators

hide
 Creators:
Barnum, Timothy1, Author           
Herman, Shaina1, Author           
Van Gelder, Jean-Louis1, Author           
Ribeaud, Denis, Author
Eisner, Manuel, Author
Nagin, Daniel S., Author
Affiliations:
1Criminology, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law, Max Planck Society, ou_2489695              

Content

hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Guardianship is a core tenet of routine activity theory and collective efficacy. At its outset, routine activity research assumed that the mere presence of a guardian was sufficient to disrupt many forms of crime. More recent research, however, has taken as a starting point that would-be-guardians must take on an active role for a reduction in crime to occur. Integrating research on bystander intervention and guardianship-in-action, the current study elaborates the individual-level motivations and decision processes of guardianship to answer the following questions: Who serves as a reactive guardian? How do they do so? And why? We tasked young adults (N = 1,032) included in the recent waves of the Zurich Project on the Social Development from Childhood to Adulthood (z-proso) to assess a 70-second video depicting a sexual harassment event. We examined participants? willingness to engage in a range of intervention options as a function of their prosocial attitudes, safety considerations, socioemotional motivations, and moral considerations. Results show a complex decision process leading to whether and how a would-be guardian decides to intervene to disrupt sexual harassment, such that prosocial motivations and emotional reactions are weighed against perceptions of danger when deciding on a specific course of action.

Details

hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2024-09
 Publication Status: Issued
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12380
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

hide
Title: Criminology
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: Wiley
Pages: - Volume / Issue: - Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: - Identifier: ISBN: 0011-1384