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.

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 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>

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>

Assessing States’ Intimate Partner Violence Offender Treatment Standards using a Principles of Effective Intervention Framework

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052110500
Author(s):  
Tara N. Richards ◽  
Angela R. Gover ◽  
Caralin Branscum ◽  
Alyssa Nystrom ◽  
Taylor Claxton
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Effective Intervention ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Treatment Programs ◽  
Offender Treatment ◽  
Treatment Standards ◽  
Risk Levels ◽  
Training Requirements

Court-ordered treatment programs are a widely used response to intimate partner violence (IPV) and many states have developed standards to guide programs. The current study provides an update to Maiuro and Eberle’s. (2008) review of states’ standards and extends the literature by using the principles of effective intervention (PEIs; i.e., risk, need, responsivity, treatment, and fidelity) as an organizational framework to examine standards. Findings showed that 84% of states had standards in 2020, compared to 88% in 2007, and extensive changes both within and across states’ standards had occurred. Regarding the PEIs, in line with the risk principle most states mandated the use of risk assessments; inconsistent with the needs principle, few states used these assessments to classify clients into risk levels or inform individualized treatment. The majority of standards addressed the treatment principle by outlining a required structure and duration, but few attended to responsivity factors (e.g., identifying treatment modalities, attending to specific client factors). Regarding the fidelity principle, most standards outlined education or training requirements for staff and required periodic program reviews or audits, but few standards were evidenced-based and only about half required that programs collect data to measure effectiveness. Taken together, findings suggest that standards have continued to evolve and that the integration of PEIs into IPV treatment is only just beginning. Standards provide a rich opportunity for future researcher–practitioner partnerships in the field of IPV intervention.

Global Surge in Intimate Partner Violence after Mandatory Lockdown: Implications for Pakistan

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Butool Hisam ◽  
Mohammad Nadir Haider ◽  
Ghazala Saleem ◽  
Admin
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Violence Against Women ◽  
Interpersonal Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Public Health Problem ◽  
The United States ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
World Health ◽  
Public Health Issue

We are observing with great concern the global spread of the COVID19 Pandemic. What is equally alarming is a less visible, albeit serious Public health issue; one that the United Nations has dubbed as the ‘Shadow Pandemic’ [1]. This is none other than the globally prevalent issue of violence against women, particularly Intimate Partner Violence. Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is a serious, possibly preventable public health problem globally. Pakistan ranks among the countries with the highest IPV rates [2]. On 11th March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the highly infectious and lethal Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) to be a pandemic [3]. Drastic measures were enforced universally to curb the spread of COVID-19. Countries issued strict nationwide lockdowns to isolate the population and implemented social distancing. The economy was impacted tremendously, and many people experienced financial and emotional hardship during this mandatory confinement. While everyone was affected, one population was in a far worse situation than others. Survivors of IPV were trapped alongside their perpetrators and faced difficulty/less freedom to escape threatening situations compared to the past. It is not surprising given that historical periods of uncertainty such as war or economic crisis have resulted in increased interpersonal violence, including violence against women [4].  The Hubei province of China, the first region to undergo a lockdown, saw nearly a doubling of their rates of IPV with the start of COVID19 Pandemic.  Similarly, tragic stories gained nationwide coverage in the United States. IPV may also have risen in Pakistan, even if it is not being covered as extensively. During pandemics, fear causes us to minimize our personal needs and make sacrifices we would not normally make. This could be a reasonable approach for most but should not be for survivors of IPV. IPV survivors live in constant fear for themselves and their children; they are now devoid of their only means of mitigation; avoidance. Local woman’s support groups in Pakistan should act and spread awareness about this grim reality hiding underneath the Pandemic. Resources/funding should be made available for survivors to be able to reach out for support without having to leave the watchful eyes of their perpetrators. Public health officials ought to investigate and document the rise in IPV to help identify the leading causes of the increase. These steps will assist in developing crisis-specific guidelines to provide adequate resources for the future. Continuous....

scholarly journals Female survivors of intimate partner violence and risk of depression, anxiety and serious mental illness

2019 ◽  
Vol 217 (4) ◽  
pp. 562-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joht Singh Chandan ◽  
Tom Thomas ◽  
Caroline Bradbury-Jones ◽  
Rebecca Russell ◽  
Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Incidence Rate ◽  
Serious Mental Illness ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Diagnostic Delay ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Female Survivors ◽  
The Uk

BackgroundInternationally, intimate partner violence (IPV) cohorts have demonstrated associations with depression and anxiety. However, this association has not yet been described in a UK population, nor has the association with serious mental illness (SMI).AimsTo explore the relationship between IPV exposure and mental illness in a UK population.MethodWe designed a retrospective cohort study whereby we matched 18 547 women exposed to IPV to 74 188 unexposed women. Outcomes of interest (anxiety, depression and SMI) were identified through clinical codes.ResultsAt baseline, 9174 (49.5%) women in the exposed group had some form of mental illness compared with 17 768 (24.0%) in the unexposed group, described as an adjusted odds ratio of 2.62 (95% CI 2.52–2.72). Excluding those with mental illness at baseline, 1254 exposed women (incidence rate 46.62 per 1000 person-years) went on to present with any type of mental illness compared with 3119 unexposed women (incidence rate 14.93 per 1000 person-years), with an aIRR of 2.77 (95% CI 2.58–2.97). Anxiety (aIRR 1.99, 95% CI 1.80–2.20), depression (aIRR 3.05, 95% CI 2.81–3.31) and SMI (aIRR 3.08, 95% CI 2.19–4.32) were all associated with exposure to IPV.ConclusionsIPV remains a significant public health issue in the UK. We have demonstrated the significant recorded mental health burden associated with IPV in primary care, at both baseline and following exposure. Clinicians must be aware of this association to reduce mental illness diagnostic delay and improve management of psychological outcomes in this group of patients.

scholarly journals Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence Among Men in Methadone Treatment Programs in New York City

2007 ◽  
Vol 97 (7) ◽  
pp. 1230-1232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nabila El-Bassel ◽  
Louisa Gilbert ◽  
Elwin Wu ◽  
Mingway Chang ◽  
Jorge Fontdevila
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
New York City ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
York City ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Methadone Treatment ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Treatment Programs

scholarly journals Intimate Partner Violence on Instagram: Visualizing a Public Health Approach to Prevention

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 90S-96S ◽  
Author(s):  
Kellie E. Carlyle ◽  
Jeanine P. D. Guidry ◽  
Sharyn A. Dougherty ◽  
Candace W. Burton
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Ecological Model ◽  
Causal Attribution ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Public Health Approach ◽  
Significant Public Health ◽  
Social Media Platforms

Social media platforms like Instagram are often used as venues for discussing relationships, making them ideal channels for promoting healthy relationships and preventing intimate partner violence (IPV). This is particularly relevant for IPV, which has been historically understood as a personal issue and lacked support for consideration as a significant public health issue. To explore a potential platform for IPV prevention, this study examines the ways in which IPV messages on Instagram reflect public health understandings of, and approaches to, prevention and how Instagram users engage with these posts. We analyzed 700 Instagram posts about IPV using the social ecological model as the theoretical framework for conceptualizing framing devices. Posts that mentioned individual causal attribution and individual solution responsibility were both present in the majority of posts and elicited more engagement than posts that did not. Encouragingly, the Instagram sample was more reflective of a range of different types of IPV experiences than previous analyses of traditional media content, possibly indicating that a public health approach to this issue is gaining traction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document