Suicide Among Southeast Asian Youth

2017 ◽  
pp. 99-111
Author(s):  
Consuelo C. Cagande ◽  
Kalvin Foo
Keyword(s):  
2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thao Le ◽  
Judy Wallen

General self-reported rates of violence and studies identifying risk factors for delinquency and serious violence have been limited for Asian, particularly Southeast Asian youth. Additionally, the role of psychosocial-cultural related factors such as individualism/collectivism, intergenerational/intercultural conflict, and ethnic identity in delinquency has largely been neglected. In a sample of 329 Cambodian, Chinese, Lao/Mien, and Vietnamese youth, robust risk factors for serious violence (aggravated assault, robbery, gang, rape) included peer delinquency, prior arrest, and victimization. In addition, cultural factors such as second generation status, individualism, and intergenerational/intercultural conflict also significantly increased the odds of serious violence, whereas factors that decreased the odds included collectivism and school achievement. For family/partner violence (hit a family member or boyfriend/girlfriend), the strongest risk factors were victimization and parent discipline. Demographics, individual, and peer domains contributed more explanatory variance for serious violence, while individual and parental domains contributed more explanatory variance for family/partner violence. Consistent with official statistics, rates of serious violence among Southeast Asian youth were higher than for Chinese youth.


2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 135-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliet P. Lee ◽  
Sean Kirkpatrick

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Thi Thu Duong

<p>Soft power is a term defined by Nye as the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments. Public diplomacy is an instrument that government uses to mobilize resources of soft power to attract the public of other countries, rather than merely their governments. Both soft power and public diplomacy have been widely used in both academic works and the media. However, in Northeast Asia, while much has been talked about soft power of a rising China, there is little empirical work on Japan’s soft power with a particular case study. Vietnam is a part of Southeast Asia, a strategic location in which Japan has a special interest. The research is an attempt to explore dimensions of Japan’s soft power and to examine whether public diplomacy is an efficient tool to enhance Japan’s soft power in Vietnam. A case study of the Ship for Southeast Asian Youth Exchange Program will be used to examine if it can help Japan project its soft power in Vietnam. Two separate surveys aiming at the participants of the program and the non-participants are conducted simultaneously. The outcomes of the two surveys will reveal whether the participants have more positive views about Japan than the non-participants. Moreover, these positive views should be correspondent with the foreign policy goals of Japan in its relations with Vietnam. Therefore, the surveys can help conclude whether the Ship for Southeast Asian Youth Exchange program contributes to the enhancement of Japan’s soft power in Vietnam.</p>


1989 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 411-411
Author(s):  
No authorship indicated

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 29-36
Author(s):  
Kohei Ishihara

In a policy-making world that is influenced by “model minority” ideology and racial aggregate data, Southeast Asian Americans have become one of the most underrepresented and misunderstood Asian American communities. Cambodian, Laotian, and Hmong youth leaders in Providence, Rhode Island, protested this lack of representation by surveying 16 percent of the city’s Southeast Asian youth population. This data became the first of its kind to provide a quantitative and qualitative portrait of the lives and issues experienced by the city’s Southeast Asian residents. Youth leaders were trained in survey administration and data analysis in order to design and execute the survey. Survey results revealed the very intricate and oppressive realities faced by Southeast Asian youth, including lack of education, gang violence, racial profiling, inter-generational conflict, as well cultural conflict over ideas of gender and sexuality. Youth leaders used the data and a process of consensus decision making to develop a list of policy-change recommendations targeting Rhode Island decision makers and power brokers.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Thi Thu Duong

<p>Soft power is a term defined by Nye as the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments. Public diplomacy is an instrument that government uses to mobilize resources of soft power to attract the public of other countries, rather than merely their governments. Both soft power and public diplomacy have been widely used in both academic works and the media. However, in Northeast Asia, while much has been talked about soft power of a rising China, there is little empirical work on Japan’s soft power with a particular case study. Vietnam is a part of Southeast Asia, a strategic location in which Japan has a special interest. The research is an attempt to explore dimensions of Japan’s soft power and to examine whether public diplomacy is an efficient tool to enhance Japan’s soft power in Vietnam. A case study of the Ship for Southeast Asian Youth Exchange Program will be used to examine if it can help Japan project its soft power in Vietnam. Two separate surveys aiming at the participants of the program and the non-participants are conducted simultaneously. The outcomes of the two surveys will reveal whether the participants have more positive views about Japan than the non-participants. Moreover, these positive views should be correspondent with the foreign policy goals of Japan in its relations with Vietnam. Therefore, the surveys can help conclude whether the Ship for Southeast Asian Youth Exchange program contributes to the enhancement of Japan’s soft power in Vietnam.</p>


2018 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Wollast ◽  
Elisa Puvia ◽  
Philippe Bernard ◽  
Passagorn Tevichapong ◽  
Olivier Klein

Abstract. Ever since Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) proposed objectification theory, research on self-objectification and – by extension – other-objectification has experienced a considerable expansion. However, most of the studies on sexual objectification have been conducted solely in Western populations. This study investigates whether the effect of target sexualization on social perception differs as a function of culture (Western vs. Eastern). Specifically, we asked a Western sample (Belgian, N = 62) and a Southeast Asian sample (Thai, N = 98) to rate sexualized versus nonsexualized targets. We found that sexual objectification results in dehumanization in both Western (Belgium) and Eastern (Thailand) cultures. Specifically, participants from both countries attributed less competence and less agency to sexualized than to nonsexualized targets, and they reported that they would administer more intense pain to sexualized than to nonsexualized targets. Thus, building on past research, this study suggests that the effect of target sexualization on dehumanization is a more general rather than a culture-specific phenomenon.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document