Racial/Ethnic Variations in Violence Against Women: Urban, Suburban, and Rural Differences

Abstract

A large literature shows that violence against women in intimate relationships varies across racial/ethnic groups. However, it is unclear whether such variations differ across urban, suburban, and rural areas. The main objective of this article is to examine this issue using 1992 to 2009 National Crime Victimization Survey data. We also test the hypothesis that racial/ethnic minority women living in rural areas are more likely to be assaulted by their current and former intimate partners than are their urban and suburban counterparts. Contrary to expectations, results indicated virtually no differences in the rates at which urban, suburban, and rural racial/ethnic minority females were victims of intimate violence. The results indicate the great need of additional research into this important topic.

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

“…Recall that existing literature presents perplexing inconsistencies including that estimates of IPV incidence are not always highest in urban settlements. In fact, the research on the effects of settlement type on IPV using the BJSUSR variable is largely equivocal as to whether the incidence of IPV against women living in rural settlements is higher, lower, or similar to that in other areas (Bachman ; Bachman and Saltzman ; DeKeseredy et al ; Greenfeld et al 1998; Rennison et al ; Rennison and Welchans ; Truman and Morgan ; Wolf Harlow ).…”

“…Of the eight studies that have used NCVS/NCS to compare the incidence of IPV against women residing in urban and rural settlements, only three have found that the incidence of IPV was higher in the former (Greenfeld et al 1998;Truman and Morgan 2014). Otherwise, although estimated urban rates were nominally greater than the rural rates, apparent differences were not statistically significant (Bachman 1994;Bachman and Saltzman 1995;DeKeseredy, Dragiewicz, and Rennison 2012;Rennison and Welchans 2000;Wolf Harlow 1991).…”

“…From the few studies considering nationally representative samples, it appears that residing in a rural settlement exacerbates victimization risk for the most vulnerable women. For instance, national estimates of IPV by race and ethnicity indicate that multirace women experience the greatest number of assaults (Breiding, Chen, and Black ), which are substantially higher for those living in rural settlements than for multirace women from urban settlements (DeKeseredy et al ). Similarly, the most vulnerable women in terms of marital status—those who are separated (Rezey )—are characterized by much higher rates of IPV when residing in rural settlements than in urban settlements (Rennison et al ).…”

Intimate Violence against Rural Women: The Current and Future State of Feminist Empirical and Theoretical Contributions

“…Carrington et al 2013;Hall-Sanchez 2014;Hogg and Carrington 2006;Sherman 2005), urban, suburban and rural differences in violence against women (e.g. DeKeseredy et al 2012;Rennison et al 2012aRennison et al , 2013aRennison et al , 2013b, and place-based analyses (e.g. Hall-Sanchez 2014; Pruitt 2008).…”

Social Isolation and Weapon Use in Intimate Partner Violence Incidents in Rural Areas

“…The statistic is astounding, yet despite its widespread occurrence much of the research on IPV continues to focus on urban settings, overlooking the unique experiences of abused rural women. Current research suggests that IPV rates are similar in urban and rural areas (DeKeseredy, Dragiewicz and Rennison, 2012); however, despite the equivalent nature of its occurrence, rural IPV has seen a profound lack of attention and documentation. There are two sets of findings that prompt a focus on rural areas.…”