通報揭露過程中恥感情緒角色之初探研究——自性暴力倖存者觀點出發

Abstract

本研究主要目的為探討羞恥情緒及其信念於通報及揭露歷程中所扮演之角色，望能為未來台灣司法訪談之提問規範制定提供一己之力。本研究一共分為兩個子研究，研究對象皆為曾歷經通報程序之女性性暴力倖存者，研究一同時採用實驗法與結構式訪談法，進行訪談提示（interviewer reminders）操弄，並以情緒叫色作業（Emotional Stroop Task）與羞恥狀態量表分別觀察羞恥情緒及信念的改變，再以內容分析法（Content Analysis）進行訪談資料分析；研究二採用半結構式訪談法針對參與研究一之受試者進行訪談，著重探討：（1）實驗情境中揭露受害經驗意願之變化，（2）羞恥情緒及信念對真實通報經驗之影響，並以主題分析（Thematic Analysis）進行資料分析。自研究一發現，接收與恥相關之訪談提示後，受試者羞恥情緒及信念皆出現上升之趨勢；且傾向需要花費較多時間甫能開始陳述遇害經驗。自研究二發現：（1）建議在未能明確斷定訪談中使用涵蓋「恥」相關字詞能提高訪談意願前，應避免使用，（2）訪談者與環境的友善程度乃是受試者認為可提升揭露意願之重要因素，（3）在尋求司法途徑協助之過程中，羞恥信念之於倖存者仍是求助的一大阻礙，且信念主要來源為家庭與非特定單位之社會群體。本研究作為初探性研究，望能為未來相關研究聚焦出更為清晰的研究方向。

Previous research has indicated a gap in the regulation of the use of terminology regarding "shame" in investigative interviewing in Taiwan. This study aims to investigate the influence of shame emotions and beliefs on the reporting process of sexual assault survivors in the context of an East Asian culture. The current study consists of two sub-studies, in which participants were female sexual violence survivors who had previously paticipated in either formal or informal reporting processes. Study 1 employed a mixed-methods design, combining experimental manipulation through interviewer reminders with structured interviews. Subjective shame state and non-subjective shame bias were subsequently measured and recorded utilizing the State Shame Scale and the Emotional Stroop task (EST), respectively. Subsequent interview statements were correspondingly recorded for textual and content analysis. In Study 2, semistructured interviews were conducted with participants who had participated in Study 1. Interviews were conducted with a focus on (a) subject interview reminder elicited emotions and impact on willingness to disclose victimization experience (b) the role of shame in past disclosure experiences. From the findings of Study 1, it was observed that the presentation of interview prompts related to shame resulted in an increase in both the affective experience of shame and related beliefs among participants. Moreover, participants tended to require more time before initiating the recounting of their experiences of victimization. Study 2 revealed several notable findings. First, it is recommended to refrain from using terms related to shame in interviews where there is no clear indication that using such terms would increase the willingness to disclose. Second, the friendliness of the interviewer and the environment were identified as important factors that can enhance participants' willingness to disclose information. Lastly, the study found that belief in shame constituted a significant impediment for survivors seeking legal assistance, with family and non-specific social others emerging as the main sources of this belief. By adopting both qualitative and quantitative approaches, this study aims to provide further perspectives for the development of investigative interview standards in the future.