Institutional Betrayal and Courage: Unearthing Trends, Gaps, and Opportunities in Research

Aubrie Patterson, MS
Doctoral Student, College of Social and Behavioral Sciences,
Northern Arizona University

Published work on institutional betrayal (IB) and increasingly, institutional courage (IC) has been rapidly growing in recent years. Dr. Jennifer Freyd, President of the Center for Institutional Courage, knew that the largest area of IB and IC research has been focused around sexual assault and harassment in higher education settings. Other than that, it was not clear what the gaps and trends were, which was a problem given her overall vision of improving institutional courage across institutions. She wanted to create a dynamic and centralized resource for researchers, clinicians, and policy makers who wanted to quickly assess what work has been done and needs to be done in IB and IC.

I was overjoyed when she invited me to be a part of the project. Over the past 6 months, I have had the privilege of leading the literature review and categorization process towards her vision, which has involved reading close to 200 published works involving IB, IC, and a few dozen on betrayal trauma and DARVO as well.

This project has clarified the state of IB and IC research for us in many ways. Here are a few key insights we’ve gained: 

  • There is a dearth of research about many institutional settings and types of harm. One that stands out to me is legal settings, where there are only 2 published studies. But these settings are likely brimming with IB, with many opportunities to define and improve IC. 

  • Surprisingly, the second largest area of published work is in the healthcare field, mostly related to medical harm towards patients and communities.

  • An encouraging increase is currently happening in IB/IC research related to racial discrimination. We came across 10 published articles that were centered on racism, which is just 5% of published work; but compare this to the fact that 23% of currently funded projects are directly focused on racism.

  • Also exciting is that study designs seem to be getting more complex. Of published research, only 6.6% were mixed-methods projects. Compare this to the currently funded projects, where almost half (48%) are mixed-methods.

The process has also opened up exciting directions for me as an emerging social scientist, given gaps I have noted along the way. For example, I am currently planning a study on IB in the Mormon church, and another on IB in diagnostic settings of people with complex trauma histories, two areas that have not been studied in the context of IB or IC.

Going forward, we plan to continue refining the information we’ve already presented, such as a summary of results for each study; and of course, adding more studies.

Thank you to Drs. Freyd and Alec Smidt for their ongoing direction and support; and thank you all for sharing this vision with us!