scholarly journals The Short-Term Effects of Gendered Primary Prevention Campaigns on Ambivalent Sexism and Beliefs about the Acceptability of Intimate Partner Violence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Shameela Halley Allen
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Experimental Design ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Ambivalent Sexism ◽  
Hostile Sexism ◽  
Female Aggression ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Male Aggression

<p>This study aimed to explore the effects of portrayed gender roles in media campaigns on participants’ endorsement of sexism and approval of intimate partner violence (IPV) across two studies. Study one (N = 227) used a within-subjects experimental design and consisted of two parts separated by a one-week period. In part one, participants completed an online questionnaire that consisted of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory and the Beliefs about Relationship Aggression Scale. In part two, participants randomly viewed a poster depicting heterosexual IPV or a non-violent control, then completed the measures. Study two (N = 380) aimed to replicate study one using a between-subjects experimental design, and followed the procedure of study one, part two. ANOVA revealed that participants approved of female to male violence significantly more than male to female violence, and this approval was more pronounced for males, indicating a chivalrous norm. Regression analyses revealed the more that females, but not males, endorsed benevolent sexism (BS), the less they approved of male aggression (no provocation). Contrarily, the more male and female participants endorsed BS, the more they approved of female aggression (total and infidelity). Hostile sexism was not related to approval. Across both studies, regression analyses revealed that exposure to a poster depicting male aggression did not significantly change participants’ approval of IPV or level of sexism. In contrast, it was found that participants who viewed a poster depicting female aggression approved of female aggression (total and infidelity) significantly less than participants who viewed a non-violent control poster, however, this was only observed in study two. Furthermore, regression analyses revealed that exposure to a poster depicting female aggression decreased participants’ endorsement of BS, with females decreasing the most relative to baseline, however, this was only observed in study one. The need for prevention campaigns to be informed by multifactorial frameworks, rather than single factor gendered theories, is discussed alongside other implications for policy and practice.</p>

scholarly journals The Short-Term Effects of Gendered Primary Prevention Campaigns on Ambivalent Sexism and Beliefs about the Acceptability of Intimate Partner Violence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Shameela Halley Allen
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Experimental Design ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Ambivalent Sexism ◽  
Hostile Sexism ◽  
Female Aggression ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Male Aggression

<p>This study aimed to explore the effects of portrayed gender roles in media campaigns on participants’ endorsement of sexism and approval of intimate partner violence (IPV) across two studies. Study one (N = 227) used a within-subjects experimental design and consisted of two parts separated by a one-week period. In part one, participants completed an online questionnaire that consisted of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory and the Beliefs about Relationship Aggression Scale. In part two, participants randomly viewed a poster depicting heterosexual IPV or a non-violent control, then completed the measures. Study two (N = 380) aimed to replicate study one using a between-subjects experimental design, and followed the procedure of study one, part two. ANOVA revealed that participants approved of female to male violence significantly more than male to female violence, and this approval was more pronounced for males, indicating a chivalrous norm. Regression analyses revealed the more that females, but not males, endorsed benevolent sexism (BS), the less they approved of male aggression (no provocation). Contrarily, the more male and female participants endorsed BS, the more they approved of female aggression (total and infidelity). Hostile sexism was not related to approval. Across both studies, regression analyses revealed that exposure to a poster depicting male aggression did not significantly change participants’ approval of IPV or level of sexism. In contrast, it was found that participants who viewed a poster depicting female aggression approved of female aggression (total and infidelity) significantly less than participants who viewed a non-violent control poster, however, this was only observed in study two. Furthermore, regression analyses revealed that exposure to a poster depicting female aggression decreased participants’ endorsement of BS, with females decreasing the most relative to baseline, however, this was only observed in study one. The need for prevention campaigns to be informed by multifactorial frameworks, rather than single factor gendered theories, is discussed alongside other implications for policy and practice.</p>

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>

Ambivalent Sexism, Alcohol Use, and Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire M. Renzetti ◽  
Kellie R. Lynch ◽  
C. Nathan DeWall
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Alcohol Consumption ◽  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Threshold Model ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Ambivalent Sexism ◽  
Hostile Sexism ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Ipv Perpetration

Research on risk factors for men’s perpetration of intimate partner violence (IPV) has shown a high correlation with problem alcohol use. Additional studies, however, indicate that the alcohol–IPV link is neither simple nor necessarily direct and that a range of factors may moderate this relationship. Using a national, community-based sample of 255 men, the present study examined the moderating effects of ambivalent sexism (i.e., hostile and benevolent sexism) on the relationship between alcohol use and IPV perpetration. The findings show that both greater alcohol consumption and high hostile sexism are positively associated with IPV perpetration, and that hostile sexism moderates the alcohol–IPV relationship for perpetration of physical IPV, but not for psychological IPV. Moreover, high levels of alcohol consumption have a greater impact on physical IPV perpetration for men low in hostile sexism than for men high in hostile sexism, lending support to the multiple threshold model of the alcohol–IPV link. Implications of the findings for prevention, intervention, and future research are discussed.

scholarly journals Myths about Intimate Partner Violence and Moral Disengagement: An Analysis of Sociocultural Dimensions Sustaining Violence against Women

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (21) ◽  
pp. 8139
Author(s):  
Chiara Rollero ◽  
Norma De Piccoli
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Moral Disengagement ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Ambivalent Sexism ◽  
Hostile Sexism ◽  
Treatment Programs ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Naive Theories ◽  
Gender Theories

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health issue worldwide and a serious violation of human rights. Recognizing IPV as a form of violence is essential for both victims who need help and offenders who can join treatment programs. Furthermore, only a society able to identify violence can effectively deal with IPV. The present study is aimed at investigating the role of sociocultural dimensions (i.e., ambivalent sexism toward women, ambivalence toward men, and lay theories about gender differences) in sustaining myths about IPV and moral disengagement. The participants were 359 university students (76.5% female). The results show that hostile sexism toward women plays a key role in sustaining both myths and moral disengagement. Moreover, benevolence toward men and biological lay gender theories (i.e., “naïve” theories assuming that sex differences are a product of biology and genetics) significantly affected the endorsement of IPV myths. The implications are discussed.

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>

Intimate Partner Violence and its Mental Health Implications Amid COVID-19 Lockdown: Findings Among Nigerian Couples

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052110152
Author(s):  
Margaret Isioma Ojeahere ◽  
Sahmicit Kankemwa Kumswa ◽  
Frances Adiukwu ◽  
Janet Punyit Plang ◽  
Yetunde Folake Taiwo
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Sampling Technique ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Health Consequences ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Health Implications

Intimate partner violence (IPV) has been identified as a global health problem with increasing mental health consequences. During the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Nigeria, couples were compelled to spend more time together, regardless of their pre-existing challenges. Our study aims to determine the prevalence of IPV, its forms, and mental health implications among Nigerian households amid the COVID-19 lockdown. A cross-sectional study was implemented which used the snowball sampling technique to recruit 474 participants across 31 states in Nigeria. A semi-structured online questionnaire was distributed using the WhatsApp platform. The relationship between IPV, its forms, and associated factors were analyzed using descriptive analysis and logistic regression with significant value at p ≤ .05 and confidence interval of 95%. Majority (98.1%) of the participants had at least a college degree and 90.1% were employed. Overall prevalence of IPV ranged from 7.2% to 13.5%. Using the lockdown as the landmark, higher prevalence was found before than during the lockdown across physical, emotional, financial, and sexual forms of IPV. Emotional form had the highest prevalence both before and during the lockdown with 11.4% and 3.8% respectively. Furthermore, 22.6% of participants reported that the lockdown affected their mental health. Hopelessness, feelings of failure, being irritable, and constantly under strain were psychological symptoms significantly associated with IPV amid the lockdown. Decreased prevalence of IPV were found in the early phase of the pandemic, suggesting that couples can experience less partner violence during periods of confinement. Our study supports existing evidence that forms of IPV have negative mental health consequences on abused partners.

Attribution Theory, Bystander Effect and Willingness to Intervene in Intimate Partner Violence

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052199794
Author(s):  
Clara N. Wijaya ◽  
Lynne D. Roberts ◽  
Robert T. Kane
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Attribution Theory ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Bystander Effect ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Measurement Models ◽  
Willingness To Intervene

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a crime that is afflicted by a current or previous romantic relationship partner. One in four women has experienced IPV at least once in their lifetime, with physical and psychological consequences. IPV cases tend to go largely unnoticed and under-reported, with low rates of intervention by bystanders. This cross-sectional correlational study investigated whether a combination of attribution theory and the bystander effect could predict the willingness of strangers to intervene in IPV. There were two models tested. The first model examined attitudes towards the victim, while the second one examined attitudes towards the perpetrator. The relationship between perceived responsibility and willingness to intervene was hypothesized to be mediated by sympathy and anger, with the number of bystanders as a moderator to mediating pathways (sympathy towards victim and anger towards perpetrator). A convenience sample of 278 Australian residents aged 18-years and older was presented in a vignette depicting an IPV incident occurring in public. Participants completed measures about the vignette in an online questionnaire. Model testing was conducted using MPlus; confirmatory factor analysis indicated a good fit of the measurement models. After controlling potential covariates, moderated mediation models of victim and perpetrator were analyzed. Attribution theory was a significant predictor in willingness to intervene ( f² = .23, p < .001), but the bystander effect was not. Both attitudes towards victim and perpetrator accounted for unique variance in willingness to intervene in IPV, highlighting the importance of examining both. Findings indicate that psychoeducation campaigns aimed at reducing victim-blaming and promoting intervening behavior could be an effective means of preventing IPV.

scholarly journals Psychometric Properties of the Inventory of Beliefs about Intimate Partner Violence (IBIPV)

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina García-Ael ◽  
Patricia Recio ◽  
Prado Silván-Ferrero
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Violence Against Women ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Ambivalent Sexism ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Potential Applications ◽  
Convergent And Divergent Validity

<p>This study analysed the psychometric properties of the Inventory of Beliefs about Intimate Partner Violence (IBIPV) which is designed to measure general and specific attitudes to violence against women in intimate relationships. The participants were 1169 people aged from 18 to 77 years. We found that the IBIPV has a three-factor structure, the factors identified were: a) <em>Justifying Partner Violence</em> (JPV), b) <em>Victims Responsible for Violence </em>(VRV) and c) <em>Abuser Responsible for Violence </em>(ARV). Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis showed three levels of measurement invariance across gender: configural, metric and scalar invariance. As expected, evidence of the convergent and divergent validity of the inventory was provided by comparisons with the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI) and Ambivalence toward Men Inventory (AMI). Potential applications of the scale in the field of partner violence are discussed.</p>

Female Intimate Partner Violence Victims and Labor Force Participation

Partner Abuse ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla VandeWeerd, ◽  
Martha L. Coulter, ◽  
Melissa C. Mercado-Crespo,
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Support ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Parenting Stress ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Employment Success ◽  
The Past ◽  
Mediating Factors

Although a non-gender-specific problem, intimate partner violence (IPV) disproportionately affects women on welfare, with an estimated prevalence two to three times larger than the national prevalence rates of IPV for all women. This article examines the effects of IPV on women leaving welfare for employment in a purposive sample of 411 women in Florida who participated or were actively participating in the 2000–2002 Work and Gain Economic Self-Sufficiency (WAGES) program. Data on sociodemographic characteristics, their IPV experiences, and mediating factors (i.e., social support, employer support, physical and mental health, parenting stress, and employment success) were collected via quantitative telephone interviews. Logistic regression analyses found that employment success among welfare-recipient women who are currently in a relationship is best predicted by a short-term impact of having experienced IPV before the past 12 months (OR = 2.17). Linear regression analyses found that having suitable housing predicted lower parenting stress (F = 3.20, p ≤ .05) and better physical health (F = 4.30, p ≤ .05) and social support (F = 1.90, p ≤ .001) outcomes. In addition, suffering from IPV within the past 12 months predicted worse mental health (F = −7.74, p ≤ .001) and lower parenting stress outcomes (F = −3.99, p ≤ .001). This study contributes to understanding the complexity of mediating factors affecting IPV’s impact on employment success of women leaving welfare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document