Intimate Partner Violence Among Hispanic Men and Women: The Role of Drinking, Neighborhood Disorder, and Acculturation-Related Factors

<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>

Download Full-text

Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence

Encyclopedia of Social Work ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.996 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Larry W. Bennett ◽

Oliver J. Williams

Keyword(s):

Intimate Partner Violence ◽

Partner Violence ◽

Emotional Abuse ◽

Physical Violence ◽

Economic Cost ◽

Intimate Partner ◽

Psychological Characteristics ◽

Lower Income ◽

Men And Women ◽

Ipv Perpetration

Perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) use coercive actions toward intimate or formerly intimate partners, including emotional abuse, stalking, threats, physical violence, or rape. The lifetime prevalence of IPV is 35% for women and 28% for men, with at an estimated economic cost of over ten billion dollars. IPV occurs in all demographic sectors of society, but higher frequencies of IPV perpetration are found among people who are younger and who have lower income and less education. Similar proportions of men and women use IPV, but when the effects of partner abuse are considered, women bear the greatest physical and behavioral health burden. Single-explanation causes for IPV such as substance abuse, patriarchy, and personality disorders are sometimes preferred by practitioners, advocates, and policymakers, but an understanding of IPV perpetration is enhanced when we look through the multiple lenses of culture and society, relationship, and psychological characteristics of the perpetrators.

Download Full-text

Associations between intimate partner violence and mental health in German men and women: a cross-sectional analysis of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults (DEGS1)

10.1101/2021.12.20.21268089 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Lena Grasskemper ◽

Diogo Costa

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Intimate Partner Violence ◽

Partner Violence ◽

Intimate Partner ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Men And Women ◽

Stress Symptoms ◽

Related Quality ◽

Health Related ◽

Ipv Perpetration

This work explores the cross-sectional associations between Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and anxiety, depressive symptoms, stress symptoms, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), in a representative sample of German adult men (n=2,789) and women (n=3,149), and considers their involvement as victims or perpetrators of physical and psychological IPV. In this sample, physical IPV victimization was associated with anxiety and stress among men. Psychological IPV victimization was associated with depression among men, and with stress among both sexes. Physical IPV perpetration was significantly associated only with women depressive and stress symptoms. Psychological IPV perpetration was associated with stress for both men and women. The mental component of HRQoL was significantly lower for men and women involved in any type of IPV. These results support the need to consider the mental health consequences of IPV involvement for both men and women.

Download Full-text

What Puts Individuals at Risk for Physical Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration? A Meta-Analysis Examining Risk Markers for Men and Women

Trauma Violence & Abuse ◽

10.1177/1524838020925776 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 152483802092577 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Chelsea M. Spencer ◽

Sandra M. Stith ◽

Bryan Cafferky

Keyword(s):

Intimate Partner Violence ◽

Partner Violence ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Analysis Data ◽

Intimate Partner ◽

Health Concern ◽

Risk Markers ◽

Men And Women ◽

Ipv Perpetration ◽

Potential Factors

Intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration is a serious public health concern around the world. This meta-analysis aimed to synthesize all available data examining risk markers for physical IPV perpetration among men and women between 1980 and 2018. Studies were included in the analysis if they examined physical IPV in adult opposite-sex relationships, included statistical information needed to calculate at least one bivariate effect size, and were written in English. A total of 503 studies, yielding 2,972 unique effect sizes, were included in the analysis. Data from these studies allowed for the examination of 63 unique risk markers related to physical IPV perpetration for both men and women, 60 unique risk markers for male perpetration, and 45 unique risk markers for female perpetration. Lastly, we were able to compare the strength of 44 risk markers for physical IPV perpetration between men and women. We found that the strongest risk markers were related to other acts of violence (both perpetration and victimization) as well as relationship dynamics. Results from this study highlight the potential factors that could be focused on in prevention programming and intervention work. Additionally, it was found that 9 out of 44 risk markers significantly differed in strength for men and women, allowing for additional specificity in intervention work for helping professionals working with either male or female perpetrators of physical IPV.

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Interpersonal Violence ◽

10.1177/0886260519876722 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

10.26686/wgtn.17147669.v1 ◽

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>

Download Full-text

The Big Five Personality Traits and Intimate Partner Violence: Findings From a Large, Nationally Representative Sample

Violence and Victims ◽

10.1891/0886-6708.vv-d-15-00055 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 31 (6) ◽

pp. 1100-1115 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Emilio C. Ulloa ◽

Julia F. Hammett ◽

Danielle N. O’Neal ◽

Emily E. Lydston ◽

Leslie F. Leon Aramburo

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Intimate Partner Violence ◽

Personality Traits ◽

Big Five ◽

Partner Violence ◽

Intimate Partner ◽

Big Five Personality Traits ◽

Big Five Personality ◽

Men And Women ◽

Ipv Perpetration

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a major public health concern. Thus, it is vital to identify factors, such as individuals’ personality traits, that may place men and women at risk for experiencing IPV. This study used data from Wave 4 of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (N = 7,187), to examine the association between the Big Five personality traits and IPV perpetration and victimization among men and women. High openness, extraversion, and neuroticism emerged as the three most important risk factors associated with IPV. Although risk factors were found to be relatively similar for IPV perpetration and IPV victimization, some gender differences emerged, showing that extraversion was only connected to IPV for women but not for men. The present findings may bear important considerations for researchers and practitioners working with individuals and couples affected by IPV.

Download Full-text

Prevalence and Severity of Intimate Partner Violence and Associations With Family Functioning and Alcohol Abuse in Psychiatric Inpatients With Suicidal Intent

Yearbook of Psychiatry and Applied Mental Health ◽

10.1016/s0084-3970(08)70407-9 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 2007 ◽

pp. 110-111

Author(s):

R.J. Frances

Keyword(s):

Intimate Partner Violence ◽

Alcohol Abuse ◽

Family Functioning ◽

Partner Violence ◽

Psychiatric Inpatients ◽

Intimate Partner ◽

Suicidal Intent

Download Full-text

Migrant Women’s Help-Seeking Decisions and Use of Support Resources for Intimate Partner Violence in China

Violence Against Women ◽

10.1177/10778012211000133 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 107780122110001

Author(s):

Ran Hu ◽

Jia Xue ◽

Xiying Wang

Keyword(s):

Intimate Partner Violence ◽

Partner Violence ◽

Help Seeking ◽

Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽

Poisson Model ◽

Intimate Partner ◽

Future Research ◽

Related Factors ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Sources Of Support

In China, women who domestically relocate from rural or less developed regions to major cities are at a higher risk for intimate partner violence (IPV) than their non-migrant counterparts. Few studies have focused on Chinese domestic migrant women’s help-seeking for IPV and their use of different sources of support. The present study aimed to identify factors that influence migrant women’s help-seeking decisions. In addition, we also examined factors that contribute to migrant women’s use of diverse sources of support for IPV. A sample of 280 migrant women victimized by IPV in the past year at the time of the survey was drawn from a larger cross-sectional study conducted in four major urban cities in China, including Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen. Using a multinomial logistic regression model and a zero-inflated Poisson model, we found that factors influencing migrant women’s help-seeking decisions and their use of diverse sources of support included socioeconomic factors, IPV type, relationship-related factors, knowledge of China’s first anti-Domestic Violence Law, and perception of the effectiveness of current policies. We discuss implications for future research and interventions.

Download Full-text