Cognitive Map of Perceptions of Social Networks as a Means of Justice in Sexual Offenses
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Phenomenon of Sexual Violence
3. Victims’ Coping Mechanism Through Formal and Informal Channels of Justice
4. The Manifestation of Sexual Violence in Social Networks
5. Theoretical Foundations: Aligning with Procedural Justice Principles
6. Understanding the Cognitive Map
7. Methodology
8. Study Population
9. Data Collection and Analysis
10. Findings
- Victims contemplate where to report/disclose the attacks.
- They weigh the importance of achieving a favorable outcome vs. having a supportive process.
- They consider which procedural justice principles, such as voice, respect, neutrality, and trustworthiness, are most meaningful to them.
- The findings reveal that victims prefer social media channels over institutions. They value the process offered by media, especially prioritizing the ability to voice their story.
11. The Existence of “Communicative Justice”
“Yes, I did that too. I did that, too. I went out with a crime reporter”.
“Yes. Totally. Social media has power. Especially if you are famous and the story is sensational, then it is to your advantage, and my story was sensational”.
“They just raped me in the police car. So, justice to turn to them? To them? No way. The establishment, I am sorry to say I do not believe in it anymore, you know, I do not believe in that concept at all”.
12. Social Media Has Great Importance as an Arena for Achieving Justice, Sometimes Even More than the Institutional Arena
“The media has more power than the courts that do justice”.
“Of the three, I think social media was the most effective for me. I do not feel like I got justice. I do not think I will get justice, but I got recognition. Moreover, I did get exposure, which was a way for me to process the process”.
“I think social media leads to more justice than the establishment”.
“They shelved my case file. They shelved my case file. Do you know what I did to get them to remove it from the archives? Moreover, what luck that it was computerized. They shelved the physical file, the material, they shelved it. We searched for it until I brought in the media, and it told them you cannot shelve such a case file”.(Interviewee 1)
“Look, I can tell you one thing. After I contacted the police and did not get any response, I turned to social media, and then they invited me on TV. When they invited me on TV, the police found me and gave me an answer very quickly”.
“Unfortunately. I think from my personal experience, I was caused more harm, injury, and trauma, more than justice was done, or however you want to call it”.
13. Procedural Justice Is More Important than Outcome Justice
“The process is much more important, the psychological support during this time is much more important”.(Interviewee 2)
“I guess, ultimately, it is important to you that the people with you really care and are with you, and even if they did everything to achieve justice and failed”.(Interviewee 8)
“I think the process is more important because so many people break down. I can tell you that the path to this desired justice can ultimately cause a person to become a broken vessel, so shattered that justice is no longer meaningful. The outcome is irrelevant because the person is shattered into pieces”.(Interviewee 11)
“I think, as someone who was raped, the process. Ultimately, it was not essential to me whether my father went to jail; I am saying that”.
“Maybe the process is more important. Because the outcome is… let us blame the guilty party; it is about finding someone to blame. Moreover, it is not interesting at all to look for someone to blame”.
14. Voice as a Leading Principle in Procedural Justice Principles
“Voice is the first, unequivocally, because you have been silent for years; that is the most important thing”.(Interviewee 12)
“Very. Very. Very. It even helps with healing; on a level, you have no idea how much it helped when they listened to me when someone just told me, “I believe you.” Wow, that is it. I have reached my destination”.(Interviewee 1)
15. Discussion and Conclusions
16. Limitations of the Research and Suggestions for Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Airey, Jennifer L. 2018. #MeToo. Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature 37: 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alaggia, Ramona, and Susan Wang. 2020. “I never told anyone until the# metoo movement”: What can we learn from sexual abuse and sexual assault disclosures made through social media? Child Abuse & Neglect 103: 104312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aubert, Adriana, and Ramon Flecha. 2021. Health and well-being consequences for gender violence survivors from isolating gender violence. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18: 8626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Axelrod, Robert, ed. 2015. Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Bogen, Katherine W., Kaitlyn K. Bleiweiss, Nykia R. Leach, and Lindsay M. Orchowski. 2021. #MeToo: Disclosure and response to sexual victimization on Twitter. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 36: 8257–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borumandnia, Nasrin, Naghmeh Khadembashi, Mohammad Tabatabaei, and Hamid Alavi Majd. 2020. The prevalence rate of sexual violence worldwide: A trend analysis. BMC Public Health 20: 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Boyce, Carolyn, and Palena Neale. 2006. Conducting in-Depth Interviews: A Guide for Designing and Conducting in-Depth Interviews for Evaluation Input. Watertown: Pathfinder International, vol. 2. [Google Scholar]
- Brooks-Hay, Oona. 2020. Doing the “right thing”? Understanding why rape victim-survivors report to the police. Feminist Criminology 15: 174–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butler, Judith. 1997. Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Caron, Sandra L., and Deborah Mitchell. 2022. “I have Never Told Anyone”: A Qualitative Analysis of Interviews With College Women Who Experienced Sexual Assault and Remained Silent. Violence Against Women 28: 1987–2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castle, Jeremiah J., Shannon Jenkins, Candice D. Ortbals, Lori Poloni-Staudinger, and J. Cherie Strachan. 2020. The effect of the #MeToo movement on political engagement and ambition in 2018. Political Research Quarterly 73: 926–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2011. National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010 Summary Report. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [Google Scholar]
- Christie, Nils. 1986. The ideal victim. In From Crime Policy to Victim Policy: Reorienting the Justice System. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 17–30. [Google Scholar]
- Clark, Haley. 2015. A fair way to go: Justice for victim-survivors of sexual violence. In Rape Justice: Beyond the Criminal Law. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 18–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daly, Kathleen. 2015. Sexual violence and justice: How and why context matters. In Rape Justice: Beyond the Criminal Law. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 36–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dancig-Rosenberg, Hadar, and Anat Peleg. 2023. Online shaming and the power of informal justice. Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dancig-Rosenberg, Hadar, Roy Rosenberg, and Anat Peleg. 2023. Post or prosecute? Facebook, the criminal justice system, and sexual assault victims’ needs. University of Illinois Law Review. in press. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4445742 (accessed on 1 January 2024).
- Dworkin, Emily R., Samantha L. Pittenger, and Nicole Allen. 2016. Disclosing sexual assault within social networks: A mixed-method investigation. American Journal of Community Psychology 57: 216–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eden, Colin. 2004. Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems. European Journal of Operational Research 159: 673–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenberg, Marla E., Katherine Lust, Michelle A. Mathiasonand, and Carolyn M. Porta. 2021. Sexual Assault, Sexual Orientation, and Reporting Among College Students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 36: 62–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Evans, Alyssa. 2018. #MeToo: A study on sexual assault as reported in the New York Times. Occam’s Razor 8: 3. Available online: https://cedar.wwu.edu/orwwu/vol8/iss1/3 (accessed on 1 January 2024).
- Fanslow, Janet L., and Elizabeth M. Robinson. 2010. Help-seeking behaviors and reasons for help seeking reported by a representative sample of women victims of intimate partner violence in New Zealand. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 25: 929–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fileborn, Bianca. 2014. Online activism and street harassment: Digital justice or shouting into the ether? Griffith Journal of Law & Human Dignity 2: 32–51. [Google Scholar]
- Fileborn, Bianca. 2017. Justice 2.0: Street harassment victims’ use of social media and online activism as sites of informal justice. British Journal of Criminology 57: 1482–1501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, Bonnie S. S., Leah. E. Daigle, Francis. T. Cullen, and Michael G. Turner. 2003. Reporting sexual victimization to the police and others: Results from a national-level study of college women. Criminal Justice and Behavior 30: 6–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fitzgerald, Louise F., Suzanne Swan, and Vicki J. Magley. 1997. But was it really sexual harassment?: Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. In Sexual Harassment: Theory, Research, and Treatment. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. [Google Scholar]
- Gallagher, Ryan J., Elisabeth Stowell, Andrea G. Parker, and Brooke Foucault Welles. 2019. Reclaiming stigmatized narratives: The networked disclosure landscape of #MeToo. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3: 198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a different voice. In Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Gjika, Ann, and Alison J. Marganski. 2020. Silent voices, hidden stories: A review of sexual assault (non) disclosure literature, emerging issues, and call to action. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy 9: 163–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodman, Lisa, Mary Ann Dutton, Natalie Vankos, and Kevin Weinfurt. 2005. Women’s resources and use of strategies as risk and protective factors for reabuse over time. Violence Against Women 11: 311–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greeson, Megan R., Rebecca Campbell, and Giannina Fehler-Cabral. 2016. “Nobody deserves This”: Adolescent sexual assault victims’ perceptions of disbelief and victim blame from police. Journal of Community Psychology 44: 90–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gueta, Keren, Sharon Eytan, and Polina Yakimov. 2020. Between healing and revictimization: The experience of public self-disclosure of sexual assault and its perceived effect on recovery. Psychology of Violence 10: 626–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gundersen, Kristin Kay, and Kristen L. Zaleski. 2021. Posting the story of your sexual assault online: A phenomenological study of the aftermath. Feminist Media Studies 21: 840–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herman, Judith Lewis. 2005. Justice from the victim’s perspective. Violence Against Women 11: 571–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hester, Marianne, and Sarah Jane Lilley. 2018. More than support to court: Rape victims and specialist sexual violence services. International Review of Victimology 24: 313–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hohl, Katrin, Kelly Johnson, and Sarah Molisso. 2022. A procedural justice theory approach to police engagement with victim-survivors of rape and sexual assault: Initial findings of the ‘Project Bluestone’ pilot study. International Criminology 2: 253–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Idås, Trond, Kristin Skare Orgeret, and Klas Backholm. 2020. #MeToo, sexual harassment and coping strategies in Norwegian newsrooms. Media and Communication 8: 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jabbar, Alaa Noori, and Nesaem Mehdi Al-Aadili. 2022. Impoliteness in Online Comments in The Johnny Depp and Amber Heard Trial. Res Militaris 12: 4350–63. [Google Scholar]
- Jenkins, Alexandria S., and Joseph P. Mazer. 2018. #NotOkay: Stories of sexual assault in the midst of the 2016 US presidential election. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication 19: 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keller, Jessalynn, Kaitlynn Mendes, and Jessica Ringrose. 2018. Speaking ‘unspeakable things’: Documenting digital feminist responses to rape culture. Journal of Gender Studies 27: 22–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kermani, Hossein, and Niloofar Hooman. 2024. Hashtag feminism in a blocked context: The mechanisms of unfolding and disrupting #rape on Persian Twitter. New Media & Society 26: 4750–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lind, E. Allan, and Tom R. Tyler. 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Berlin: Springer. [Google Scholar]
- Long, Lisa J. 2021. The ideal victim: A critical race theory (CRT) approach. International Review of Victimology 27: 344–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowenstein-Barkai, Hila. 2020. Gender matters? A content analysis of user comments towards male and women victims of sexual abuse. Megamot 55: 167–90. (In Hebrew). [Google Scholar]
- Madden, Stephanie, and Rebecca A. Alt. 2021. Know her name: Open dialogue on social media as a form of innovative justice. Social Media + Society 7: 2056305120984447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marganski, Alison J., and Lisa A. Melander. 2021. Technology-facilitated violence against women and girls in public and private spheres: Moving from enemy to ally. In The Emerald International Handbook of Technology-Facilitated Violence and Abuse. Bradford: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 623–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mendes, Kaitlynn, Jessica Ringrose, and Jessalyn Keller. 2018. #MeToo and the promise and pitfalls of challenging rape culture through digital feminist activism. European Journal of Women’s Studies 25: 236–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Public Security. 2014. National Violence Index. Available online: https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/reports/bithon_pnim_6_violence_index/he/%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%93%20%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%AA.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2024).
- Mor, Abigail. 2009. The extent of exposure to sexual violence among women in Israel and its characteristics: A preliminary assessment. Social Issues in Israel 7: 46–65. [Google Scholar]
- Morabito, Melissa S., Linda M. Williams, and April Pattavina. 2019. Decision Making in Sexual Assault Cases: Replication Research on Sexual Violence Case Attrition in the US. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. [Google Scholar]
- Murphy, Kristina, and Julie Barkworth. 2014. Victim willingness to report crime to police: Does procedural justice or outcome matter most? Victims & Offenders 9: 178–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Neill, Tull. 2018. ‘Today I speak’: Exploring how victim-survivors use Reddit. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy 7: 44–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Powell, Anastasia. 2015. Seeking rape justice: Formal and informal responses to sexual violence through technosocial counter-publics. Theoretical Criminology 19: 571–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roth-Cohen, Osnat. 2022. Viral feminism: #MeToo networked expressions in feminist Facebook groups. Feminist Media Studies 22: 1695–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubin, Herbert J., and Irene S. Rubin. 2011. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. Thousand Oaks: Sage. [Google Scholar]
- Schneider, Kimberly T., and Nathan J. Carpenter. 2020. Sharing #MeToo on Twitter: Incidents, coping responses, and social reactions. Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion: An International Journal 39: 87–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sills, Sophie, Chelsea Pickens, Karishma Beach, Lloyd Jones, Octavia Calder-Dawe, Paulette Benton-Greig, and Nicola Gavey. 2016. Rape culture and social media: Young critics and a feminist counter public. Feminist Media Studies 16: 935–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stabile, Bonnie, Aubrey Grant, Hemant Purohit, and Mohammad Rama. 2019. “She Lied”: Social construction, rape myth prevalence in social media, and sexual assault policy. Sexuality, Gender & Policy 2: 80–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stubbs-Richardson, Megan, Shelby Gilbreath, MacKenzie Paul, and Audrey Reid. 2023. It’s a global #MeToo: A cross-national comparison of social change associated with the movement. Feminist Media Studies 24: 1330–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thibaut, John, Laurens Walker, Stephen LaTour, and Pauline Houlden. 1973. Procedural justice as fairness. Stanford Law Review 26: 1271–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tolman, Edward C. 1948. Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review 55: 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tyler, Tom R. 1988. What Is Procedural Justice?: Criteria Used by Citizens to Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures. Law & Society Review 22: 103–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tyler, Tom R. 1990. Why People Obey the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Wemmers, Jo-Anne. 2008. Victim participation and therapeutic jurisprudence. Victims and Offenders 3: 165–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wood, Mark, Evelyn Rose, and Chrissy Thompson. 2019. Viral justice? Online justice-seeking, intimate partner violence and affective contagion. Theoretical Criminology 23: 375–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wooten, Sara Carrigan. 2017. Revealing a hidden curriculum of Black women’s erasure in sexual violence prevention policy. Gender and Education 29: 405–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Health Organization. 2002. World Report on Violence and Health. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/42495/1/9241545615_eng.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2024).
- World Health Organization. 2021. Violence Against Women Prevalence Estimates, 2018: Global, Regional and National Prevalence Estimates for Intimate Partner Violence Against Women and Global and Regional Prevalence Estimates for Non-Partner Sexual Violence Against Women. Executive Summary. Geneva: World Health Organization. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nadav-Carmel, H.; Lev-On, A. Cognitive Map of Perceptions of Social Networks as a Means of Justice in Sexual Offenses. Journal. Media 2024, 5, 1771-1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia5040107
Nadav-Carmel H, Lev-On A. Cognitive Map of Perceptions of Social Networks as a Means of Justice in Sexual Offenses. Journalism and Media. 2024; 5(4):1771-1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia5040107
Chicago/Turabian StyleNadav-Carmel, Hila, and Azi Lev-On. 2024. "Cognitive Map of Perceptions of Social Networks as a Means of Justice in Sexual Offenses" Journalism and Media 5, no. 4: 1771-1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia5040107
APA StyleNadav-Carmel, H., & Lev-On, A. (2024). Cognitive Map of Perceptions of Social Networks as a Means of Justice in Sexual Offenses. Journalism and Media, 5(4), 1771-1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia5040107