Is violence ever right? Moral reasoning about violence among youngsters belonging to gangs and peacebuilding groups.
Is violence ever right? Moral reasoning about violence among youngsters belonging to gangs and peacebuilding groups.
复制标题
暴力永远是正确的吗？
DOI：
10.1037/vio0000376
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Dedios Sanguineti M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dedios Sanguineti M
目的：研究来自帮派（n= 33）和建设和平（n= 30）群体的弱势青年对暴力的文化群体层面理解及其与个人暴力道德推理的关系。方法通过对哥伦比亚两个低收入社区的深入访谈，我们采用主题分析方法，探索和比较不同青年群体对暴力的理解——包括暴力的定义、暴力的因果归因以及日常生活中处理暴力的策略。接下来，我们使用卡方分析来评估根据八种潜在的道德暴力触发因素，赞同暴力道德的参与者比例的组间差异。结果两类青少年对暴力的定义相似，但有一个关键区别。只有帮派成员将代理归于“团体”（即帮派和家庭），将其描述为能够伤害和被伤害的社会实体。这种理所当然的文化假设将帮派成员对暴力的辩护框定为捍卫自己群体的道德辩护。与此同时，来自暴力团体的年轻人中有较高比例的人支持用暴力来捍卫自己的声誉是道德的(p=。001)，荣誉(p<。0.001)，组(p=。001)。结论群体间对暴力的共同理解差异与群体间对暴力的个人道德推理差异是一致的。这些发现对提高暴力预防干预措施的效力具有重要意义，这些干预措施很少考虑到年轻人对暴力的共同理解与使用暴力的道德推理之间的联系。（PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2021 APA，版权所有）
ObjectiveWe investigate cultural group-level understandings of violence and their connections to individual moral reasoning about violence among disadvantaged young people belonging to gangs (n= 33) and peacebuilding (n= 30) groups.MethodsDrawing from in-depth interviews in two low-income neighborhoods in Colombia, we use thematic analysis to explore and compare group-level understandings of violence—entailing definitions of violence, causal attributions of violence, and strategies to handle violence in everyday life—by type of youth group. Next, we use a chi-square analysis to assess between-group differences in the proportion of participants endorsing the morality of violence according to eight potential moral violence triggers.ResultsYouths from both types of groups define violence in similar terms with one key difference. Only gang members ascribe agency to “the group”(ie, the gang and the family) describing it as a social entity capable of harming and being harmed. This taken-for-granted cultural assumption frames the gang members’ justifications of violence as moral to defend one’s group. Concurrently, a higher proportion of youths from violent groups support the morality of violence to defend one’s reputation (p=. 001), honor (p<. 001), and group (p=. 001).ConclusionsBetween-group differences in shared understandings of violence are consistent with differences in individual moral reasoning about violence across group type. The findings have implications for improving the efficacy of violence prevention interventions, which rarely account for the link between young people’s shared understandings of violence and moral reasoning about its use.(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)