Autonomy, Dependence or Culture: Examining the Impact of Resources and Socio-cultural Processes on Attitudes Towards Intimate Partner Violence in Ghana, Africa

Mann, Jesse R.; Takyi, Baffour K.

doi:10.1007/s10896-009-9232-9

Cited by 78 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conversely, men in male-dominated relationships may have more power to refuse sex. However, these associations did not hold for physical IPV, which conflicts with other research from sub-Saharan Africa that shows couples who share power and decision making are less violent (Choi & Ting, 2008) and less accepting of wife beating (Hindin, 2003; Mann & Takyi, 2009). Socio-cultural norms are believed to reinforce women’s beliefs that they are subordinate to their husbands and thus are more deserving of IPV (Lawoko, 2008).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Gender, Power, and Intimate Partner Violence

Conroy

2013

J Interpers Violence

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender-based power imbalances are perhaps the most compelling underlying explanation for intimate partner violence (IPV) among women in sub-Saharan Africa. However, an overemphasis on female victimization results in an incomplete understanding of men’s experiences as victims and the broader dyadic context in which violence occurs. This study examines the role of three domains of relationship power (power resources, processes, and outcomes) on sexual and physical IPV victimization in a unique sample of 466 young couples from Malawi. Two power resources were studied, namely, income and education level. Power processes were captured with a measure of couple communication and collaboration called unity. Power outcomes included a measure of relationship dominance (male dominated or female-dominated/egalitarian). Multilevel logistic regression using the Actor Partner Interpersonal Model framework was used to test whether respondent and partner data were predictive of IPV. The findings show that unity and male dominance were salient power factors that influenced young people’s risk for sexual IPV. Unity had a stronger protective effect on sexual IPV for women than for men. Involvement in a male-dominated relationship increased the risk of sexual IPV for women, but decreased the risk for men. The findings also showed that education level and unity were protective against physical IPV for both men and women. Contrary to what was expected, partner data did not play a role in the respondent’s experience of IPV. The consistency of these findings with the literature, theory, and study limitations are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Gender, Power, and Intimate Partner Violence

Conroy

2013

J Interpers Violence

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The feminist theories have also made their argument that defined gender roles within patriarchal societies in addition to men's systematic efforts to control women through the use of power and domination are the major causes or factors of IPV (Bell & Naugle, 2008;Pinto et al, 2010). This finding also collaborates with Machisa et al (2018) and Mann and Takyi (2009) when they made similar findings in their studies. Again, some of the participants identified peer influence as one of the factors that can lead to violence in intimate partner relationships (Elgar et al, 2015;Fleming et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Forms of and Factors Associated With Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence by Men on Their Female Partners Following HIV Status Disclosure in the Ashanti Region of Ghana: A Qualitative Study

Apiribu¹,

Ncama²,

Duma³

2020

GJHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Men’s experiences of perpetration of intimate partner violence against their female heterosexual partners following disclosure of their HIV positive status is a global health problem. The forms of IPV and factors associated with IPV following the disclosure are under-researched. In this article, we aim to explore and describe the forms of and factors associated with men’s experiences of perpetration of IPV against their female partners following the disclosure of seropositive HIV status. Methods: An exploratory qualitative research design using an interpretive phenomenological analysis method was employed for the data collection from participants (men) who perpetrated violence against their HIV positive women. The study setting was done in two HIV clinics in two Hospitals. The study population consisted of all men whose intimate partners had been diagnosed HIV positive and made known to their partners and are seeking healthcare at the two HIV clinics. Purposive sampling technique was employed to recruit participants for the study. An interpretive phenomenological approach was employed for the collection and analysis from eighteen men whose partners had recently disclosed their seropositive HIV status. An interview guide was the tool employed for the data collection. Data collection and analysis were undertaken concurrently. Results: Most of the participants identified and described the forms of and factors associated with IPV influencing them to perpetrate IPV. Five themes and sub-themes emerged and these include; emotional factors, spousal related factors, Social related factors, Sex-related factors and some forms of IPV which were identified by participants. Each of these themes has subthemes. Conclusion: Men use different forms of IPV violence in abusing women who disclosure their HIV seropositive status. Several factors as identified in this study accounts for this partner violence. Forms and factors associated with intimate partner violence should be used as a guide in formulating policies and developing a guide that can be utilised in the early detection of IPV in this category of women.

show abstract

“…The status inconsistency theory argues that men aligned with the principles of patriarchy understand power as a signal of masculinity and will turn violent when that power is challenged by their female partners (Atkinson, Greenstein, and Lang, 2005;Chung, Tucker, and Takeuchi, 2008). For example, research in developing-mostly patriarchal-countries has found that women who work and make higher incomes than their male partners (Chung, Tucker, and Takeuchi, 2008) or are socially active may be abused by them (Antai, 2011;David, Chin, and Herradura, 1998;Flake and Forste, 2006;Gage and Hutchinson, 2006;Heaton and Forste, 2007;Hindin, Kishor, and Ansar, 2008;Mann and Takyi, 2009;Meekers, Pallin, and Hutchinson, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender inequality and intimate partner violence in Bolivia

Camargo

2019

Rev. colomb. soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intimate partner violence against women is of particular concern in Bolivia, a country ranked second among ten Latin American countries in the prevalence of physical and sexual violence toward women (Hindin, Kishor, and Ansara, 2008). This study examines the correlation between intimate partner violence and the type of domestic decision making. Using factor analysis and structural equation modeling on a sample of 2,759 Bolivian heterosexual couples, this study finds that intimate partner violence is less likely to occur in families in which the decision making is egalitarian (female and male partners make decisions together) but more likely to occur when either the male partner or the female partner makes decisions alone. These findings support the hypotheses that the gender distribution of power may cause conflict between intimate heterosexual partners (Anderson, 1997; Dobash, Dobash, Wilson, and Daly, 1992; Jewkes, 2002). It also goes further in demonstrating that such distribution could lead to egalitarian, matriarchal, or patriarchal domestic decision making and that there are differential consequences for both intimate partner offending and victimization. In rural areas, Bolivian women are more vulnerable; men more often make decisions alone; and women are less educated and poorer than in urban areas. In the patriarchal-type family, men make decisions and may abuse their female partners physically and psychologically. This type of family is poorer and less educated, and it is inversely correlated with women’s and men’s education. Indeed, education seems to play a key role in heterosexual relationships; men's education is inversely correlated with females' physical victimization. However, these findings also support a) the status inconsistency theory: in wealthier, more educated households, the female partner made decisions alone but was still physically and psychologically abused by her intimate partner, and b) intimate partner violence is influenced by structural factors, such as patriarchal beliefs, social power structure, poverty, and social inequalities (Barak, 2003, 2006).

show abstract

Autonomy, Dependence or Culture: Examining the Impact of Resources and Socio-cultural Processes on Attitudes Towards Intimate Partner Violence in Ghana, Africa

Cited by 78 publications

References 37 publications

Gender, Power, and Intimate Partner Violence

Gender, Power, and Intimate Partner Violence

Forms of and Factors Associated With Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence by Men on Their Female Partners Following HIV Status Disclosure in the Ashanti Region of Ghana: A Qualitative Study

Gender inequality and intimate partner violence in Bolivia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About