Childhood Sexual Abuse and Antisocial Traits and Behaviors: A Gendered Examination of the Factors Associated With Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (20) ◽  
pp. 3125-3161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle A. Cubellis ◽  
Bryce Elling Peterson ◽  
Alana M. Henninger ◽  
Daiwon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Hierarchical Linear Modeling ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Mediating Effect ◽  
Physical Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
And Behaviors ◽  
The Relationship

The current study addressed the relationship between child sexual abuse (CSA) and perpetration of physical intimate partner violence, examining the possible mediating effect of antisocial traits and behaviors, as well as the differences in these relationships between men and women. Data came from the International Dating Violence Study. Hypotheses were tested on a sample of 13,659 university students from 68 sites and 32 countries using hierarchical linear modeling. Results indicated that CSA was significantly associated with perpetration of physical intimate partner violence for both men and women. The slope of the relationships, however, varied across sites for women. Antisocial traits and behaviors fully mediated the relationship between CSA and perpetration of physical intimate partner violence for women but only partially mediated this relationship for men. Increased focus needs to be paid to gender differences on the effect of CSA on the development of antisocial traits and behaviors, the relationship between these factors and perpetration of intimate partner violence, and the variation of these relationships across nations.

Coercive Controlling Behaviors and Reporting Physical Intimate Partner Violence in Australian Women: An Exploration

2021 ◽  
pp. 107780122098593
Author(s):  
Brittany Patafio ◽  
Peter Miller ◽  
Arlene Walker ◽  
Kerri Coomber ◽  
Ashlee Curtis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Physical Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Differential Utility ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Controlling Behaviors

This study explores two approaches to measuring coercive controlling behaviors (CCBs)—counting how many different CCB types and examining the frequency of each CCB experienced—to examine their utility in explaining the relationship between CCBs and physical intimate partner violence (IPV). Australian women aged 18–68 years ( n = 739; Mage = 31.58, SDage = 11.76) completed an online survey. Count and frequency CCB approaches yielded similar significant associations with increased physical IPV. Both approaches suggest that frightening behaviors in particular are significantly indicative of also experiencing physical IPV; however, when you count CCB types, public name-calling becomes important, whereas when you examine the frequency of each CCB type, jealousy/possessiveness becomes important. These findings suggest differential utility between measures of CCBs, which examine the frequency of specific CCB types and which count CCB types, and that both approaches are useful in understanding how coercion and control relate to physical violence within intimate relationships.

Chivalry vs. Patriarchy: Exploring the Psychological Mechanisms of Physical Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Ara A'Court
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Ambivalent Sexism ◽  
Benevolent Sexism ◽  
Hostile Sexism ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Ipv Perpetration ◽  
Gendered Theory ◽  
The Relationship

<p>Two leading theories propose different reasons for men’s and women’s intimate partner violence (IPV). The gendered theory proposes that society’s patriarchal norms of male dominance and female subordination cause men’s IPV towards women. From this perspective, violence against ‘wives’ is condoned by society, and women only perpetrate IPV in self-defence against men’s primary violence. Conversely, the chivalrous theory of IPV explains women’s IPV perpetration in terms of society’s chivalrous norms, which protect women from male violence and emboldens women to physically assault male partners. From this perspective, women’s violence is not considered harmful to men. As gendered theory and chivalrous theory both reference stereotyped gender attitudes (sexism) towards women, I used the ambivalent sexism inventory (ASI) to test the competing theories efficacy in explaining IPV perpetration by heterosexual men and women. The ASI conceptualises sexist attitudes towards women as comprised of two parts: hostile sexism (reflecting the hostility towards women outlined by gendered theory), and benevolent sexism (reflecting the benevolence towards women outlined by chivalrous theory). Gendered theory states that society condones violence towards women. Thus, men’s attitudes approving of male-perpetrated IPV should mediate the relationship between men’s hostile sexism and IPV, if gendered theory predictions are correct. Alternatively, chivalrous theory poses that society does not approve of violence towards women. Thus, attitudes disapproving of men’s IPV against women and approving of women’s IPV towards men should mediate the relationship between benevolent sexism and IPV if chivalrous theory is correct. I hypothesized men’s increased hostile sexism would predict men’s increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of IPV against women, and men’s increased benevolent sexism would predict men’s decreased IPV perpetration through decreased approval of IPV against women. Further, I hypothesised that women’s increased hostile sexism would predict women’s increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of IPV against men, and women’s benevolent sexism would predict increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of IPV against men. North American men and women (N = 688) filled out an online questionnaire measuring experiences of IPV as victims and/or perpetrators, approval of male and female IPV perpetration, and hostile and benevolent sexism. Multi-group structural equation modelling tested the extent to which positive attitudes toward intimate partner violence mediated the association between sexism and IPV perpetration for men and for women. Results found that, for both men and women, increased hostile sexism predicted greater IPV perpetration through greater approval of men’s IPV against women. Furthermore, increased benevolent sexism predicted women’s increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of men’s IPV against women. Men’s increased benevolent sexism did not predict men’s lower IPV perpetration or disapproval of IPV against women. However, men’s and women’s ambivalent sexism also predicted greater approval of women’s IPV towards men. Results did not fully support patriarchal or chivalrous predictions, instead aligning well with ambivalent sexism theory which posits a more inclusive and holistic understanding of the relationship between sexism and IPV perpetration. Reducing all forms of sexism and men’s and women’s positive attitudes toward the use of IPV are identified as important targets for IPV treatment and prevention.</p>

Women and Men’s Use of Coercive Control in Intimate Partner Violence

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Robertson ◽  
Tamar Murachver
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Coercive Control ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Violent Relationships ◽  
Three Samples ◽  
Conflict Tactics ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Controlling Behaviors

This study examined the relationship between coercive control and intimate partner violence (IPV) for men and women and for targets and perpetrators. One hundred and seventy-two participants (85 men, 87 women) recruited from three samples reported on their own and their partner’s behavior. IPV was measured using the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2). Coercive control was measured using modified items from the Psychological Maltreatment of Women Inventory (PMWI). Coercive control was associated with IPV, and this relationship was similar for men and women across the three samples. In fact, coercive control was predominantly reciprocal in nature, with women and men reporting both receiving and perpetrating controlling behaviors. Overall, coercive controlling behaviors were characteristic of individuals within violent relationships, regardless of their physical abuse status. The experience of violence, rather than gender, was the best predictor of coercive control.

The Cycle of Violence Revisited: Distinguishing Intimate Partner Violence Offenders Only, Victims Only, and Victim-Offenders

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 573-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tara N. Richards ◽  
Elizabeth Tomsich ◽  
Angela R. Gover ◽  
Wesley G. Jennings
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Dating Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Cycle Of Violence ◽  
Physical Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Witnessing Violence ◽  
Ipv Perpetration ◽  
The U.S

Using a cycle of violence framework, we investigated experiences with physical intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization, perpetration, and both IPV victimization and perpetration (IPV overlap). Data included the U.S. subsample of college students in the International Dating Violence Study (n = 4,162). Findings indicated that 40% of participants reported lifetime IPV, with 28% reporting membership in the overlap group. Cycle of violence variables including child sexual abuse, witnessing violence inside the home during childhood, and witnessing violence outside the home during childhood were uniquely related to membership in the overlap group. No relationship between cycle of violence variables and IPV victimization only or IPV perpetration only was identified. Results suggested the cycle of violence might predominantly operate among individuals who are both IPV victims and offenders, rather than among individuals experiencing IPV victimization or perpetrate IPV exclusively.

scholarly journals Sexual and physical intimate partner violence among women using antenatal care in Nampula, Mozambique

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eusébio Chaquisse ◽  
Sílvia Fraga ◽  
Paula Meireles ◽  
Glória Macassa ◽  
Joaquim Soares ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Antenatal Care ◽  
Physical Abuse ◽  
Alcohol Drinking ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Physical Intimate Partner Violence

The aim was to estimate the prevalence of sexual and physical intimate partner violence (IPV) and its associated factors, in a sample of pregnant women using antenatal care (ANC) in Nampula province - Mozambique. This cross-sectional study was carried out in six health units in Nampula, from February 2013 to January 2014. Overall, 869 participants answered the Conflict Tactics Scale 2. The lifetime and past year prevalence of sexual abuse was 49% and 46%, and of physical abuse was 46% and 44%, respectively. Lifetime and past year sexual abuse was significantly associated with living as a couple, alcohol drinking and having a past diagnosis of gonorrhea. Lifetime and past year physical abuse increased significantly with age and was associated with living as a couple, alcohol drinking and history with syphilis. The prevalence of lifetime and previous year violence among women using ANC was high and similar showing that most women were constantly exposed to IPV. ANC provides a window of opportunity for identifying and acting on violence against women.

The Role of Violence Acceptance and Inequitable Gender Norms in Intimate Partner Violence Severity Among Couples in Zambia

2019 ◽  
pp. 088626051987672
Author(s):  
Shoshanna L. Fine ◽  
Jeremy C. Kane ◽  
Sarah M. Murray ◽  
Stephanie Skavenski ◽  
Saphira Munthali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Gender Norms ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Heterosexual Couples ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Ipv Perpetration ◽  
The Relationship

Inequitable gender norms, including the acceptance of violence in intimate relationships, have been found to be associated with the occurrence of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration and victimization. Despite these findings, few studies have considered whether inequitable gender norms are related to IPV severity. This study uses baseline data from a psychotherapeutic intervention targeting heterosexual couples ( n = 247) in Lusaka, Zambia, who reported moderate to severe male-perpetrated IPV and male hazardous alcohol use to consider: (a) prevailing gender norms, including those related to IPV; (b) the relationship between IPV acceptance and IPV severity; and (c) the relationship between inequitable gender norms and IPV severity. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to model the relationships between IPV acceptance and inequitable gender norms, and female-reported IPV severity (including threats of violence, physical violence, sexual violence, and total violence), separately among male and female participants. In general, men and women were similar in their patterns of agreement with gender norms, with both highly endorsing items related to household roles. More than three-quarters of men (78.1%) and women (78.5%) indicated overall acceptance of violence in intimate relationships, with no significant differences between men and women in their endorsement of any IPV-related gender norms. Among men, IPV acceptance was associated with a statistically significant increase in IPV perpetration severity in terms of threatening violence ( B = 5.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.84, 9.89]), physical violence ( B = 4.54, 95% CI = [0.10, 8.98]), and total violence ( B = 11.65, 95% CI = [3.14, 20.16]). There was no association between IPV acceptance and IPV victimization severity among women. Unlike IPV acceptance, there was no evidence for a relationship between inequitable gender norms and IPV severity for either men or women. These findings have implications for the appropriateness of gender transformative interventions in targeting men and women in relationships in which there is ongoing IPV.

scholarly journals Chivalry vs. Patriarchy: Exploring the Psychological Mechanisms of Physical Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Ara A'Court
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Ambivalent Sexism ◽  
Benevolent Sexism ◽  
Hostile Sexism ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Ipv Perpetration ◽  
Gendered Theory ◽  
The Relationship

<p>Two leading theories propose different reasons for men’s and women’s intimate partner violence (IPV). The gendered theory proposes that society’s patriarchal norms of male dominance and female subordination cause men’s IPV towards women. From this perspective, violence against ‘wives’ is condoned by society, and women only perpetrate IPV in self-defence against men’s primary violence. Conversely, the chivalrous theory of IPV explains women’s IPV perpetration in terms of society’s chivalrous norms, which protect women from male violence and emboldens women to physically assault male partners. From this perspective, women’s violence is not considered harmful to men. As gendered theory and chivalrous theory both reference stereotyped gender attitudes (sexism) towards women, I used the ambivalent sexism inventory (ASI) to test the competing theories efficacy in explaining IPV perpetration by heterosexual men and women. The ASI conceptualises sexist attitudes towards women as comprised of two parts: hostile sexism (reflecting the hostility towards women outlined by gendered theory), and benevolent sexism (reflecting the benevolence towards women outlined by chivalrous theory). Gendered theory states that society condones violence towards women. Thus, men’s attitudes approving of male-perpetrated IPV should mediate the relationship between men’s hostile sexism and IPV, if gendered theory predictions are correct. Alternatively, chivalrous theory poses that society does not approve of violence towards women. Thus, attitudes disapproving of men’s IPV against women and approving of women’s IPV towards men should mediate the relationship between benevolent sexism and IPV if chivalrous theory is correct. I hypothesized men’s increased hostile sexism would predict men’s increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of IPV against women, and men’s increased benevolent sexism would predict men’s decreased IPV perpetration through decreased approval of IPV against women. Further, I hypothesised that women’s increased hostile sexism would predict women’s increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of IPV against men, and women’s benevolent sexism would predict increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of IPV against men. North American men and women (N = 688) filled out an online questionnaire measuring experiences of IPV as victims and/or perpetrators, approval of male and female IPV perpetration, and hostile and benevolent sexism. Multi-group structural equation modelling tested the extent to which positive attitudes toward intimate partner violence mediated the association between sexism and IPV perpetration for men and for women. Results found that, for both men and women, increased hostile sexism predicted greater IPV perpetration through greater approval of men’s IPV against women. Furthermore, increased benevolent sexism predicted women’s increased IPV perpetration through increased approval of men’s IPV against women. Men’s increased benevolent sexism did not predict men’s lower IPV perpetration or disapproval of IPV against women. However, men’s and women’s ambivalent sexism also predicted greater approval of women’s IPV towards men. Results did not fully support patriarchal or chivalrous predictions, instead aligning well with ambivalent sexism theory which posits a more inclusive and holistic understanding of the relationship between sexism and IPV perpetration. Reducing all forms of sexism and men’s and women’s positive attitudes toward the use of IPV are identified as important targets for IPV treatment and prevention.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document