Attitudes, Values And Beliefs On Violence Within New Zealand Families: An Essay.

Background to the study, the research question/objectives/hypothesis and/or topic, the researchers and the target audience

Discuss about the Business Research Report Attitudes, Values and Beliefs.

This report comprises of a review of a social research survey carried out in 2008 by the Centre for Social Research and Evaluation and published in 2010, authored by Fleur McLaren on the attitude, values and beliefs on violence within New Zealand families. The survey was based on a background that a lot of violent cases within families where intimate relationships exist, are as a result of attitudes, beliefs and values that excuse violence within the society, at different times (McLaren 2010).  Further, the background to the study indicates that a lot of violent partners and/or individuals in families hold different views towards violence and could excuse it as the best option at some points.  The effects of violence are many but some individuals only believe that violence is not harmful as long as there are no physical injuries (McLaren 2010).  Even so, this is not the case and therefore, the research would later indicate the need to still fight family violence due to other effects such as mental problems among others. The survey was carried out in order to come up with actions that the New Zealand communities could fight the war against violence in homes and in relationships. The research targeted men, women, children and the elderly in New Zealand (McLaren 2010).  However, the information is intended to reach all concerned parties including human rights institutions, policy advocacy groups, the communities in general and the New Zealand government, more so the law making arm, and the judiciary.

The objectives of the study included to; determine the different definitions of “family violence” by New Zealanders; gauge their levels of awareness on family violence, determine different attitudes held by New Zealanders regarding family violence and measuring the extent at which New Zealanders are ready to take appropriate action against cases of family violence.

Research Methods Used Outlining Their Strengths, Limitations and Appropriateness for the Research Question/Objectives/Hypothesis and/or Topic

The survey involved the use of questionnaires and face-to-face interviews that were served to respondents in households in areas including Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Hamilton, Dunedin, Hastings/Napier, Invercargill, Whangarei, Palmerston North, Rotorua, New Plymouth, and Tauranga among others (McLaren 2010).  The two methods were the main techniques of collecting information, which was later analysed and presented in tables, graphs and percentages.

The Strengths of Using Questionnaires

The use of questionnaires ensures that the researcher does not leave out any concern outlined in the objectives with an aim of achieving the results from the field. They are also convenient in areas where community members are literate. One may need to be able to read and understand before filling in the answers. In this regard, a research assistant can help a respondent in reading and interpreting the questions to the respondent, in order to obtain answers to fill in the questionnaire (Frick 2009). Further, questionnaires could be translated into a different language by the researcher and still maintain the same thoroughness in its approach to answering each question, related to the objectives of the research (Frick 2009). Another advantage of using questionnaires is that the data obtained can be easily fed into analytical systems such as SPSS, to provide presentable information, which can provide the trends and the situation on the ground. This was the case for this particular research.

Research Methods Used Outlining Their Strengths, Limitations and Appropriateness for the Research Question/Objectives/Hypothesis and/or Topic

In regard to weaknesses first, it is clear that questionnaires are quite time consuming and may need a lot of time to fill in (Frick 2009). In this case, the researcher approximate that the questionnaire or the interview would take 40 minutes with little disruptions. However, this means that those who cannot be first enough in answering the questions would take more than an hour. The long time taken to interview an individual would need the researcher to only interview or serve the respondents with questionnaires when they have little commitments such as work.

For interviews, it is clear that they also must have taken a long time for respondents in households.  Sometimes interviews are affected by a language barrier (Toot et al 2015).  In the areas identified for this social research on attitudes, values and beliefs on violence, it is clear that some respondents may not be good in expressing themselves in English. Therefore, a need to translate into one’s convenient language could make an individual to be skipped by research assistants, or find a research assistant, familiar with an individuals’ own preferred language.

Even so, interviews are crucial, as they help in substituting questionnaires, where they may not be necessary and/or effective (Toot et al 2015).  Interviews help in collecting first hand information for the respondents and if an audio is used in this case, a researcher can be able to read it and transcribe it later, into actual responses in the preferred language, in line with the questionnaires. The use of interviews was crucial in this case, as some of the community members would want to share more crucial information regarding violence in families (Toot et al 2015).  Being a sensitive aspect in society, talking to individuals who might have at one point, been involved in family feuds leading to violence could b viewed by the individual as an opportunity to share their problems and feel relieved.  The interviews and questionnaires could still work as awareness creation tools through using a whole set of inquiries on the less talked about topic in society; violence in families. Therefore, the choice of questionnaires and face-to-face interview by the Centre for Social Research and Evaluation was quite appropriate for this research.

Evaluation of Ethical considerations

This research considered five main principles of research ethics. One of the principles indicates that there is need to minimize the risk of harm. In this regard, the research questionnaires and the interviews included questions that could not directly bring any emotional harm to the respondents, who were the sample population of the New Zealanders according to Jacobsen (2011). Thus, direct confrontational questions were adjusted into properly crafted quizzes, where an individual could just respond to them without being angered and/or feeling targeted.

Evaluation of Ethical considerations

The second principle of research ethics states that there is need to obtain an informed consent (Jacobsen2011). The Centre for Social Research and Evaluation sought the permission of authorities in the areas mentioned above, to allow the researchers to collect information legally. Further, the household respondents were asked to volunteer in their response, without coercion. It was one’s own choice to accept to be respondents, on the request of the researcher on family violence attitudes, beliefs and values in New Zealand.

Thirdly, the need to protect anonymity was taken care of as indicated by the researchers. It is important to assure respondents of their privacy, and their information must not be shared with anyone, except for research analysis purposes (Lewis 2010). The researcher asked the respondents to give their names at will (Sachs 2010). However, those who did not want to indicate their names were asked to at least, indicate the area they came from for analytical reasons. Further, the researchers avoided any deceptive practices in seeking for information from the public (Sachs 2010). Similarly, the respondents were asked not to include any false information, as it would render the study inaccurate.

The last principle in regard to the need to provide an individual respondent or group the right to withdraw from taking part in the research (Sachs 2010). As stated above, the researcher allowed the respondents to give responses at will. Those who accepted to be interviewed or served with the questionnaires did so at their own will.  Thus, those who would wish to withdraw were left out in order to concentrate on willing respondents.

The survey brought out different results in regard to the attitudes, the values n the believes of New Zealand citizens on violence that occurs within families. The first finding was that majority of the respondents strongly believed that violence in families, was not as a solution to particular misunderstandings. In this regard, they indicated that there are many options, which one could use to solve misunderstandings, since it is normal for family members to at one point or the other misunderstand each other (McLaren 2010).  Among the options, include seeking advice from friends and family, reporting some cases to authorities that could be extreme and/or solving one on one through talking out the issue, especially in intimate relationships.

Secondly, the study established that majority of the respondents had attitudes which were in support of the equality of men and women in a given relationship (McLaren 2010).  Therefore, there is need for mutual agreements in regard to different crucial decisions in relationships.  When there are issues to be addressed therefore, each party must be considered equal, and not inferior.  This is because the later breeds violence due to misunderstandings that crop up in families and in other intimate relationships between men and women.

Thirdly, the study established that all respondents strongly indicated that they believed that all members of society suffer negative outcomes from violence. These include women, men, elderly in society, and children.  Injuries could be sustained; emotional suffering including mental complications among other effects develop as a result of violence. In extreme cases, violence leads to deaths of partners, children or generally family members (McLaren 2010).  Another finding related to this was that most of the respondents indicated that they were not in agreement that violence is only harmful when there is physical injury.  This myth was refuted by majority of these respondents indicating that they were aware of other effects of violence mentioned above.

Another finding was that majority of the respondents indicated that it remains the responsibility of the community to support the members to be violence-free and develop relationships with their intimate partners, the elderly parents and the children. Even so, competing beliefs were noted, indicating that what happened in one’s home is a private issue.  However, there were competing beliefs held by the same respondents that what happens in any given home is a private issue (McLaren 2010).   The study established that most community members were willing to take action in times of family violence, except where they thought it was none off their business to take a particular action, to subvert any family violence, away from their own homes.

Extent to Which the Conclusions and/or Recommendations Are Well-Founded and Justified

The research concludes and recommends first that there is need for education in order to change different beliefs regarding violence and at the same time, emphasize that there should be no excuses to be given for a lack of control and a choice for violence in resolving issues. This statement is well founded according to Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (2008), since majority of advocacy groups on violence indicate that educating individuals in intimate relationships and communities on violence is a huge step towards changing their attitudes towards the issue.

In regard to the effects of violence, the Centre for Social Research and Evaluation recommends that New Zealanders need to be educated on how to support victims to leave violent relationships and ensure that each of the victims is safe. This recommendation is justified, since people need to be aware of the reasons that influence women for instance, to remain in violent relationships (Adams 2007). This could help the community to understand how to support these individuals, even at the time they need to leave the relationship, if the partner or assailant continues with the misbehavior.

The researcher further recommends the use of mass media campaigns to end violence in homes. This is a justified approach as mass media is far reaching, than any other campaigns aimed at educating individuals against the continuously reported cases of violence (Adams 2007). The media will help also to notify the assaulters the penalties they could face if handed to the authorities and charged in New Zealand courts of law.

Research Context & Implications for the Research Process & Outcomes

Since the research takes a social context, the research processes including the methodologies used in gathering information have been tailor-made to suit the respondents an obtain the outcomes that reflect the actual situation on the ground. The context of the study considers that the researchers use the appropriate language, structure the questions that are in line with research ethics, and indulge the respondents professionally in the interviews.  Further, the context of the research calls for the need to involve authorities for permission, and high-level professionalism.  Violence in families is regarded as a sensitive issue and a researcher may not be sure whether the respondent has been exposed to it at one point in their homes. Thus, the context influences generally, the choice of methods of data collection, and the presentation of the outcomes to the public.

References

Fleur McLaren (2010) Attitudes, Values and Beliefs about Violence within Families 2008 Survey Findings. Centre for Social Research and Evaluation. ISBN 978-0-478-32359-7

Adams, D (2007). Why Do They Kill? Men who murder their intimate partners. Violence Against Women; 14, 727.

Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (2008). Strategic Direction for Intimate Partner Violence Prevention: Promoting Respectful, Nonviolent Intimate Partner Relationships through Individual, Community and Societal Change.  https://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/IPV_Strategic_Direction_One-Pager-a.pdf

Cercone, J J, Beach, S R H, & Arias, I (2005). Gender symmetry in dating intimate partner violence: Does similar behavior imply similar constructs? Violence and Victims, 20(2), 207-218.

Chamberland, C, Fortin, A, & Laporte, J (2007). Men's recognition of violence against women and spousal abuse: comparison of three groups of men. Violence and Victims, 22(4), 419-436.

Fanslow, J (2005). Beyond Zero Tolerance: Key issues and future directions for family violence work in New Zealand. The report for the Families Commission, Wellington, New Zealand.

Fanslow, J L & Robinson, E M (in press). 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.

Flood, M & Pease, B (2006). The Factors Influencing Community Attitudes in Relation to Violence against Women: A Critical Review of the Literature Paper Three of the Violence against Women Community Attitudes Project. Mental Health and Wellbeing Unit, Victoria Health Promotion Foundation, Melbourne.

Jacobsen, K. (2011). Research Ethics: Principles, Practices, and Reporting. World Medical & Health Policy, 3(2), 40-46. https://dx.doi.org/10.2202/1948-4682.1161

Lewis, J. (2010). Ethics Principles for Social Science Research: Report of a Meeting on 22 March 2010 Jointly Sponsored by AREC, the Social Research Association and the Academy of Social Sciences. Research Ethics, 6(2), 56-57. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/174701611000600206

SACHS, B. (2010). Going from principles to rules in research ethics. Bioethics, 25(1), 9-20. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01744.x

Frick, K. (2009). Microcosting Quantity Data Collection Methods. Medical Care, 47(Supplement), S76-S81. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/mlr.0b013e31819bc064

Toot, J., Pringle, T., Berkley, K., Simons, M., & Atterson, P. (2015). Manual versus automated data collection: Evaluation of a modified testing paradigm and learning/memory endpoints using a complex water T-maze in juvenile rats. Journal Of Pharmacological And Toxicological Methods, 75, 163-164. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vascn.2015.08.021