Intimate partner violence against women in the European Union: The influence of male partners’ traditional gender roles and general violence.

Abstract

Objective: The influence of partners’ traditional gender role and partners’ level of general violence on intimate partner violence (IPV) against women has been studied separately most likely because they represent key aspects of apparently contrasting theoretical views. The main goal of the present study was to investigate the influence of both partners’ gender role and partners’ level of general violence on IPV against women. Method: Using data from 20,663 heterosexual women living with their partners from a probabilistic sample of 18- to 74-year-old women in the European Union, we investigated the association among physical and psychological IPV against women, partners’ traditional roles, and partners’ level of general violence. Results: The multilevel regression results indicated that, even after controlling for a number of interviewer, respondent, partner, and country-level characteristics, partners’ traditional gender role and partners’ level of general violence (main effects) were predictive of higher rates of physical and psychological IPV against women. Moreover, the greatest levels of IPV were observed in women who described their partners as both traditional and generally violent (interaction effect). Conclusions: The influence of partners’ traditional gender role and partners’ level of general violence on IPV against women has rarely been studied together most likely due to the apparently conflicting underlying theoretical assumptions. Our study provides empirical support for both views and suggests that intervention efforts focusing on both gender-based and non–gender-based violence are legitimate strategies for reducing the rates of IPV against women in society.

When Violence Can Appear With Different Male Partners: Identification of Resilient and Non-resilient Women in the European Union

“…The evidence available at this point in the literature is mixed. In the review of studies by Ørke et al (2018) , only one study reported a positive relationship between low income and victimization by multiple partners ( Vatnar and Bjørkly, 2008 ) while other research on IPV has informed of a negative relationship between satisfaction with income and both physical and psychological IPV ( Herrero et al, 2017b ).…”

“…Interviewers were asked to assess whether each respondent’s responses were insincere overall: “Do you think the respondent was telling the truth in the interview?” Responses ranged from 1 ( yes, all the time ) to 4 ( not at all ; M = 1.19, SD = 0.46). Although other research with this same dataset has also controlled for privacy and safety during the interview ( Herrero et al, 2017b ), we did not include these variables in the analyses because of zero variance in some countries (Germany, Lithuania, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and United Kingdom).…”

“…Although the evidence is not conclusive, it seems that the youngest women are more at risk of being victimized by multiple partners ( Testa et al, 2003 ; Alexander, 2009 ). Other sociodemographic characteristics such as income, education, ethnicity, or unemployment, seem to be unrelated to victimization by multiple partners (see Ørke et al, 2018 ) although there is empirical evidence of their relationships with IPV ( Herrero et al, 2016 , 2017b ). Length of the relationship with a new partner seems also to be positively related to IPV with a new partner ( Cole et al, 2008 ).…”

“…This evidence does not seem to have been investigated in studies on IPV revictimization, which could reflect a potential limitation of research in this area. Structural aspects such as the human development of a country have shown to be predictors of the country’s IPV levels, after controlling for a wide range of individual factors ( Herrero et al, 2017b , 2018 ). It would be necessary to verify if these structural risk factors also play a relevant role in the IPV revictimization of women, especially in multi-country studies.…”

Considering the Effect of Sexism on Psychological Intimate Partner Violence: A Study with Imprisoned Men

“…Carlson, 1984;Cummings, González-Guarda, & Sandoval, 2013;Han, Kim, & Tyson, 2010;Heise, 1998;Little & Kaufman, 2002;Tonsing, 2011). However, there have been some recent adoptions of the ecological framework to empirically analyze risk factors (e.g., Akhter & Wilson, 2016;Herrero et al, 2017). In the current research, we apply an empirical, ecological approach to provide more accurate information about the relevance of hostile sexism and attitudes toward IPV in predicting psychological aggression.…”