2019
DOI: 10.1111/ruso.12264
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intimate Partner Violence in Small Towns, Dispersed Rural Areas, and Other Locations: Estimates Using a Reconception of Settlement Type

Abstract: Current understanding of victimization of those in rural settlements compared to other types of settlements is limited by inadequate classifications of settlement types. The typical approach—one based on the incorrect use of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s classification of metropolitan areas—may mask important variations in the incidence of violent victimization, and in part explain mixed results related to this issue. To investigate this, we detail problems with following the typical approach, and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
17
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
2
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results of this study concerning the prevalence of IPV are in line with earlier research considering its incidence across the conventional measure of settlement type (DuBois et al, 2019). There is a similar risk of IPV victimization for women from "rural" (i.e., nonmetropolitan) and "urban" (i.e., metropolitan central cities) settlements while both are at greater risk relative to women from "suburban" (i.e., metropolitan noncentral city) settlements.…”
Section: Duboissupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results of this study concerning the prevalence of IPV are in line with earlier research considering its incidence across the conventional measure of settlement type (DuBois et al, 2019). There is a similar risk of IPV victimization for women from "rural" (i.e., nonmetropolitan) and "urban" (i.e., metropolitan central cities) settlements while both are at greater risk relative to women from "suburban" (i.e., metropolitan noncentral city) settlements.…”
Section: Duboissupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Going beyond the OMB's intended purpose results in a measure that categorizes places in ways that do not correspond conceptually. For instance, many settlements are coded by the MSA status variable as suburban even though they are culturally rural (e.g., Amish communities outside of Lancaster, Pennsylvania or the farms of the San Joaquin Valley) or ecologically desolate (e.g., the Mojave Desert of California's Imperial and San Bernardino Counties; DuBois et al, 2019). Similarly, the conventional coding of nonmetropolitan counties as rural ignores a sizable proportion (42%) of their populations living on residential blocks classified by the U.S. Census Bureau (2012aBureau ( , 2012b as urban.…”
Section: Problematic Conflation Of Nonmetropolitan and Ruralmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of limitations must be considered in interpreting findings from the present study. First, the Fragile Families study only sampled families from large cities; thus, findings cannot be generalized to nonurban areas (DuBois et al, 2019; Gustafsson & Cox, 2016) and housing insecurity (Henry et al, 2020). Second, dependent variables did not cover the full range of emotional and behavioral problems youth may experience in the transition adolescence.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The prevalence of disability in the United States increases stepwise with rurality; the highest rates of people with disabilities reside in the most rural areas (Zhao et al, 2019). Furthermore, violence in rural settings is at least as prevalent as urban areas (Edwards, 2015), and some studies indicate small towns may have the highest prevalence of violence against women (DuBois et al, 2019). The social conditions of rurality, including more traditional gender-roles, little to no transportation options, the difficulty of maintaining confidentiality and anonymity, a digital divide, and reduced options for quality healthcare influence rural women's experiences (Bell, 2014;Wathen & Harris, 2007).…”
Section: The Context Of Ruralitymentioning
confidence: 99%