发表机构
University of Wisconsin--Madison; Northwestern University（威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校; 西北大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究通过创伤知情培训提升性别暴力倡导者应对技术辅助虐待的能力，基于8次工作坊和自反性分析提出三项关键设计决策，并提供实践检查清单。
AI 中文摘要
技术辅助虐待（TFA）是一种新兴的、具有性别特征（gendered）的公共健康危机，影响着全球数百万人。TFA与其他形式的性别暴力（GBV）并存，例如亲密伴侣实施的情感、心理和身体虐待。幸存者通常寻求性别暴力（GBV）倡导者的支持，这些倡导者专门帮助幸存者应对虐待情境以及可能的疗愈和补救途径。然而，随着TFA的增多，幸存者和GBV倡导者在识别和缓解这种不断演变的较新虐待形式方面面临障碍和知识空白。为解决这一问题，我们开发了创伤知情培训，作为一项关键的能力建设干预措施，旨在提高GBV倡导者回应幸存者的知识和技能，并鼓励多利益相关方协作以形成结构性应对。我们在美国本地、州和全国性的GBV组织举办了8次培训工作坊。我们的研究表明，这些培训提高了倡导者对TFA虐待载体及其对幸存者影响的感知理解，也增强了倡导者通过社区利益相关者协作提供支持、安全规划和转介的信心。随后，我们通过自我民族志（autoethnography）进行回顾性反思，以揭示我们在与主办GBV组织设计和协调培训过程中出现的经验教训、争议和紧张关系。我们对自我民族志笔记的分析揭示了三个关键设计决策：灵活协调后勤、减少与主办组织和参与者的反思性距离，以及利用我们的实地经验定制内容以增强可及性。我们提供了一个具体的检查清单，以指导未来HCI学者在高风险情境中为利益相关者开展培训干预。
英文摘要
Technology-facilitated abuse (TFA) is an emerging gendered public health crisis affecting millions of people across the globe. TFA coincides with other forms of gender-based violence (GBV), such as emotional, psychological, and physical abuse by an intimate partner. Survivors often seek support from GBV advocates who specialize in helping survivors navigate abusive situations and potential pathways for healing and remediation. With the rise in TFA, however, survivors and GBV advocates experience barriers and gaps in knowledge in identifying and mitigating this newer, ever-evolving form of abuse. To address this, we developed trauma-informed training as a critical capacity-building intervention to improve GBV advocates' knowledge and skills for responding to survivors and to encourage multi-stakeholder collaboration toward a structural response. We facilitated 8 training workshops at local, state, and national US-based GBV organizations. Our study demonstrates that the trainings increased advocates' perceived understanding of TFA abuse vectors and their impacts on survivors, along with advocates' confidence in providing support, safety planning, and referrals through collaboration with community stakeholders. We then conducted retrospective reflections through autoethnography to surface key lessons, contestations, and tensions that emerged from our experiences in designing and coordinating trainings with host GBV organizations. Our analysis of autoethnographic notes revealed three key design decisions: coordinating logistics flexibly, reducing reflexive distance from host organizations and attendees, and using our field experience to tailor content for accessibility. We contribute a concrete checklist to guide future HCI scholars in conducting training interventions for stakeholders in high-stakes contexts.
