Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Purpose: This study examined how the narrative framing of a child protection case shapes social workers’ assessments of a family's situation, perceived risk to children, and family strengths. Method: A randomized vignette survey was conducted among 411 social workers in Poland, who were assigned to read either a professional report or a family voice narrative describing the same multiproblem family. Both vignettes contained identical factual content but differed in narrative perspective. Results: Across all outcomes, the professional frame produced more negative evaluations of the family, higher perceived child risk, and lower ratings of family strengths. Regression analyses confirmed that narrative perspective was the strongest predictor of assessments. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that narrative framing systematically influences professional judgments, highlighting the importance of narrative awareness and balanced case documentation in child protection decision-making.

Keywords

child protection risk assessment social work decision-making narrative framing family strengths vignette study institutional communication

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alexander

C. S.

Becker

H. J.

(1978). The use of vignettes in survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42(1), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1086/268432

Allchin

Isobel

(2024). Re-imagining the vulnerability and risk framing of parents with mental illness and their children. Frontiers in Public Health, 12, 1373603. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPUBH.2024.1373603/BIBTEX

Altman

J. C.

(2008). A study of engagement in neighborhood-based child welfare services. Research on Social Work Practice, 18(6), 555–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731507309825

Anastas

(2000). Research design for social work and the human services. Columbia University Press.

Baumann

D. J.

Dalgleish

Fluke

Kern

(2011). The decision-making ecology. American Humane Association.

Baumann

D. J.

Fluke

J. D.

Dalgleish

Kern

(2014). The decision-making ecology. From Evidence to Outcomes in Child Welfare, 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199973729.003.0002

Benbenishty

Davidson-Arad

López

Devaney

Spratt

Koopmans

Knorth

E. J.

Witteman

C. L. M.

Del Valle

J. F.

Hayes

(2015). Decision making in child protection: An international comparative study on maltreatment substantiation, risk assessment and interventions recommendations, and the role of professionals’ child welfare attitudes. Child Abuse & Neglect, 49, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.03.015

Besharov

(1991). Child abuse and neglect reporting and investigation: Policy guidelines for decision making. Child & Youth Services, 15(2), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1300/J024v15n02_02

Bride

B. E.

Robinson

M. M.

Yegidis

Figley

C. R.

(2004). Development and validation of the secondary traumatic stress scale. Research on Social Work Practice, 14(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731503254106

10.

Bryman

(2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

11.

Caiels

Milne

Beadle-Brown

(2021). Strengths-based approaches in social work and social care: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Long Term Care, 2021, 401–422. https://doi.org/10.31389/JLTC.102

12.

Caro

F. G.

Yee

Levien

Gottlieb

A. S.

Winter

McFadden

D. L.

T. H.

(2012). Choosing among residential options. Research on Aging, 34(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027511404032

13.

Christiansen

Anderssen

(2009). From concerned to convinced: Reaching decisions about out-of-home care in Norwegian Child Welfare Services. Child & Family Social Work, 15(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2206.2009.00635.x

14.

Ebsen

Svendsen

I. L.

Thomsen

L. P.

Jørgensen

(2023). Decisions in child protection—Heuristics, law and organisation. The British Journal of Social Work, 53(5), 2940–2957. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJSW/BCAD065

15.

Fraidin

(2017). Stories told and untold: confidentiality laws and the master narrative of child welfare. Maine Law Review, 63(1). https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/mlr/vol63/iss1/2

16.

Gillingham

(2006). Risk assessment in child protection: Problem rather than solution? Australian Social Work, 59(1), 86–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/03124070500449804

17.

Gregory

(2023). Story-building and narrative in social workers’ case-talk: A model of social work sensemaking. Child & Family Social Work, 28(4), 949–959. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.13014

18.

Harnett

P. H.

(2024). Managing risk and uncertainty in the context of child protection decision making. The British Journal of Social Work, 54(6), 2435–2449. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJSW/BCAE056

19.

Hughes

(2008). Vignettes. In Given

(Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909.n453

20.

Hughes

Huby

(2004). The construction and interpretation of vignettes in social research. Social Work and Social Sciences Review, 11(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1921/17466105.11.1.36

21.

Hyman

M. R.

Steiner

S. D.

(1996). The vignette method in business ethics research: Current uses and recommendations. https://philpapers.org/rec/HYMTVM

22.

Kadushin

(1997). The social work interview: A guide for human service professionals. Columbia University Press.

23.

Kemp

S. P.

Marcenko

M. O.

Lyons

S. J.

Kruzich

J. M.

(2014). Strength-based practice and parental engagement in child welfare services: An empirical examination. Children and Youth Services Review, 47(P1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHILDYOUTH.2013.11.001

24.

Križ

Skivenes

(2013). Systemic differences in views on risk: A comparative case vignette study of risk assessment in England, Norway and the United States (California). Children and Youth Services Review, 35(11), 1862–1870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.09.001

25.

Lamponen

Aarnio

(2024). Social workers’ assessment of a child’s need for services as ‘craftwork’ practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 38(2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2024.2302603

26.

Michelson

(2022). Negotiating master narratives: The practice of ‘counterstorying’ in children’s personal narratives about family-related adversities. Child & Family Social Work, 27(4), 616–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/CFS.12910

27.

Munro

(2011). A child-centred system. Department of Education.

28.

Nygren

Oltedal

(2015). Constructing a vignette for qualitative comparative family research. Journal of Comparative Social Work, 1, 1. https://journals.uis.no/index.php/JCSW/article/download/123/107

29.

Pecora

P. J.

(2010). What works in foster care? Key components of success from the Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study. Oxford University Press.

30.

Przeperski

(2018). Metoda epizodów (vignettes) w badaniach społecznych i familiologicznych. Konteksty teoretyczne i praktyczne. Problemy Polityki Społecznej, 42(3), 53–67.

31.

Przeperski

(2021). Social work paradigms and their effect on decision making about out-of-home placement. Research on Social Work Practice, 31(4), 327–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731520985607

32.

Reuven Even Zahav

Refaeli

Shemesh

Gottlieb

Ben-Porat

(2020). Supervision satisfaction among social work students in Israel: Supervision components, peer support, and trauma-related factors. Research on Social Work Practice, 30(8), 884–894. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731520936755

33.

Roets

Roose

De Wilde

Vanobbergen

(2017). Framing the ‘child at risk’ in social work reports: Truth-telling or storytelling? Journal of Social Work, 17(4), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017316644864

34.

Saleebey

(2002). The strengths perspective in social work practice. 296p.

35.

Taylor

B. J.

(2006). Factorial surveys: Using vignettes to study professional judgement. British Journal of Social Work, 36(7), 1187–1207. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJSW/BCH345

36.

Taylor

B. J.

(2017a). Decision making, assessment and risk in social work (3rd ed.). Sage.

37.

Taylor

B. J.

(2017b). Heuristics in professional judgement: A psycho-social rationality model. The British Journal of Social Work, 47(4), 1043–1060. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcw084

38.

Toros

(2014). Graduate social work students’ approaches and ways of thinking in child protection assessment: Case vignette reflections from Estonia. Social Work Education, 33(7), 890–905. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2014.894972

39.

Toros

Falch-Eriksen

(2021). Strengths-based practice in child welfare: A systematic literature review. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 30(6), 1586–1598. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10826-021-01947-X

40.

Turley

Roberts

Foster

Warner

El-Banna

Evans

Nurmatov

Walpita

Scourfield

(2022). Staff wellbeing and retention in children’s social work: Systematic review of interventions. Research on Social Work Practice, 32(3), 281–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315211052639

41.

Tversky

Kahneman

(1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.7455683

42.

Wilkins

Keddell

(2024). Risk perceptions and experience in child protection decision-making: A comparative study of student social workers in Wales and Aotearoa New Zealand. Children and Youth Services Review, 163, 107623. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHILDYOUTH.2024.107623

43.

Yatchmenoff

D. K.

(2005). Measuring client engagement from the client’s perspective in nonvoluntary child protective services. Research on Social Work Practice, 15(2), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731504271605

44.

Yelick

Thyer

(2019). The effects of family structure and race on decision-making in child welfare. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 14(3), 336–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/15548732.2019.1616651

Framing Family Risk in Child Protection: A Randomized Vignette Study

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References