Difference between revisions of "Whitehead-etal2018"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Kevin A. Whitehead; Brett Bowman; Geoffrey Raymond;
 
|Author(s)=Kevin A. Whitehead; Brett Bowman; Geoffrey Raymond;
 
|Title=“Risk factors” in action: The situated constitution of “risk” in violent interactions
 
|Title=“Risk factors” in action: The situated constitution of “risk” in violent interactions
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Risk factors; Violence
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Risk factors; Violence; Racism
 
|Key=Whitehead-etal2018
 
|Key=Whitehead-etal2018
 
|Year=2018
 
|Year=2018

Latest revision as of 14:48, 11 June 2020

Whitehead-etal2018
BibType ARTICLE
Key Whitehead-etal2018
Author(s) Kevin A. Whitehead, Brett Bowman, Geoffrey Raymond
Title “Risk factors” in action: The situated constitution of “risk” in violent interactions
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Risk factors, Violence, Racism
Publisher
Year 2018
Language English
City
Month
Journal Psychology of Violence
Volume 8
Number 3
Pages 329–338
URL Link
DOI 10.1037/vio0000182
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this report was to consider some ways in which a range of phenomena commonly treated as “risk factors” for violence (including social asymmetries based on factors such as gender, race and class; and drug or alcohol intoxication) become observable in violent (or potentially violent) interactions. In doing so, we contribute to a growing body of research focused on moving beyond cataloguing factors abstractly associated with risk for violent outcomes, toward specifying the ways in which these risk factors are constituted in “doing violence” itself.

Methods: We employed an ethnomethodological and conversation analytic approach to examine the sequential unfolding of interactions in which violent actions are projected and/or realized, drawing on a collection of 105 videos downloaded from the video sharing site YouTube.

Results: Our analysis demonstrates how participants in the interactions orient to or deploy “risk factors” as resources for the production of actions and/or for interpreting or accounting for the actions of themselves and others both prior to, during or following the production of violent actions.

Conclusions: The findings demonstrate that the target phenomena, rather than simply being abstracted “risk factors” (in a distal or “upstream” sense), are constitutive features of the in situ unfolding of conflicts in which violence comes to be projected (if not always realized) as an outcome. As a result, the ontological distance between “risk” and “enactments” of violence effectively dissolves when episodes in which these phenomena appear are subjected to detailed analysis.

Notes