Search results

Since the criminalisation of coercive control (CC), there have been a growing number of cases in the UK; however, there continues to be minimal research, understanding and education about this type of abuse. Hence, it is unsurprising that young people are at the highest risk of CC as they enter their first intimate relationships with limited awareness of the risks. The aim of this study is to explore how 16- to 24-year-olds in the UK understand CC in intimate relationships.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 young people to explore their knowledge of CC, sources of knowledge and learning opportunities. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to examine the interviews.

A total of 14 participants had heard of CC. Participants attributed victims and perpetrators behaviour to individual and environmental factors, including societal and gendered expectations. Young people explained that their knowledge came from experiences, online sources and family and friends. However, participants recognised the importance of credible messengers and sources, and some were sceptical of information shared online. Most had not learnt about CC in formal education but expressed the importance of incorporating it into the secondary curriculum.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to explore how young people understand CC in the UK. The findings highlight the need for better understanding and formal education around CC, provide a platform for future work and encourage the incorporation of young voices in developing interventions.

The purpose of this study is to contribute to the existing literature on the importance of mentorship in academia, particularly in higher education. Specifically, this study aims to address the research gap related to academic mentorship from a gendered perspective. The Productive Mentoring Framework and relational–cultural theory theoretically support this study.

In this qualitative descriptive study, purposive sampling was used to recruit 19 participants for semi-structured interviews and a focus group. Two research questions guided this study: (1) How do individuals who identify as women describe the importance of mentorship in academia? (2) How do individuals who identify as women describe mentorship in academia from a gendered perspective? Using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis, a total of six themes emerged, with three themes identified for each of the two research questions from the data: (a) guidance and support, (b) personal and professional development, (c) inclusive and accountable relationships, (d) empathetic and supportive mentorship, (e) interpersonal connectivity and (f) gender empowerment and advocacy.

The research findings suggest that the participants held perceptions of gender disparity within academia. Additionally, empowering interpersonal relationships with other women and supportive environments were crucial in overcoming challenges and developing personally and professionally in higher education institutions. Future research is recommended to explore the perspectives of women supporting women and the perception of gender disparity in academia.

While successfully addressing the research questions, this study has limitations. One limitation was that this study had a relatively small sample size of participants who identified as women, which limited the focus of this research. Another limitation was that interview and focus group participants did not mention working with mentors who fall outside the traditional binary of male and female. Finally, limitations can occur in qualitative research as there is potential bias in the data analysis process. However, member-checking and codebook verification were utilized to minimize this constraint.

There are practical implications from the research for mentoring practices in academia. Since the results indicated benefits to women, institutions could prioritize mentoring programs, especially pairing same-gender mentors and mentees. This helps new employees navigate academia. Mentoring fosters interpersonal connectivity, improving academic culture. By supporting mentoring relationships and professional friendships, leaders positively impact dynamics within institutions. Gender disparities and systemic barriers call for advocacy within higher education. Mentor training programs should address these issues, providing a platform for solutions. Administrators' awareness may support efforts to improve equity.

The study is original in its focus on academic mentorship from a gendered perspective, as described by women in academia, notably higher education.