Psychosocial Implications of Supportive Attitudes towards Intimate Partner Violence against Women throughout the Lifecycle
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Instruments
2.3. Procedure
2.4. Data analysis
3. Results
3.1. Explicit Measures of Attitude towards IPVAW
3.2. Implicit Measures of Attitude towards IPVAW
3.3. Other Evidence about Attitudes towards IPVAW
3.4. Gender Differences
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Devries, K.M.; Mak, J.Y.T.; Garcia-Moreno, C.; Petzold, M.; Child, J.C.; Felder, G.; Lim, S.; Bacchus, L.J.; Engell, R.E.; Rosenfeld, L.; et al. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science 2013, 340, 1527–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization. Global and Regional Estimates of Violence against Women: Prevalence and Health Effects of Intimate Partner Violence and Non-Partner Sexual Violence; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Abramsky, T.; Watts, C.H.; Garcia-Moreno, C.; Devries, K.; Kiss, L.; Ellsberg, M.; Jansen, H.A.; Heise, L. What factors are associated with recent intimate partner violence? Findings from the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence. BMC Public Health 2011, 16, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Flood, M.; Pease, B. Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma Violence Abuse 2009, 10, 125–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Heise, L.L.; Kotsadam, A. Cross-national and multilevel correlates of partner violence: An analysis of data from population-based surveys. Lancet Glob. Health 2015, 3, e332–e340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jewkes, R.; Fulu, E.; Tabassam Naved, R.; Chirwa, E.; Dunkle, K.; Haardörfer, R.; Garcia-Moreno, C. Women’s and men’s reports of past-year prevalence of intimate partner violence and rape and women’s risk factors for intimate partner violence: A multicountry cross-sectional study in Asia and the Pacific. PLoS Med. 2017, 14, e1002381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Puente, A.; Ubillos, S.; Echeburua, E.; Paez, D. Risk factors associated with the violence against women in couples: A review of meta-analysis and recent studies. An. Psicol. 2016, 32, 295–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sardinha, L.; Najera, H.E. Attitudes towards domestic violence in 49 low- and middle-income countries: A gendered analysis of prevalence and country-level correlates. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0206101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tran, T.D.; Nguyen, H.; Fisher, J. Attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women among women and men in 39 low- and middle-income countries. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0167438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, L. Factors influencing attitude toward intimate partner violence. Aggress. Violent Beh. 2016, 29, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gracia, E.; Lila, M. Attitudes towards Violence against Women in the EU; European Commission Directorate-General for Justice: Luxembourg, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Gracia, E.; Lila, M.; Santirso, F.A. Attitudes toward intimate partner violence against women in the European Union: A systematic review. Eur. Psychol. 2020, 25, 104–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gracia, E.; Rodríguez, C.M.; Lila, M. Preliminary evaluation of an analogue procedure to assess acceptability of intimate partner violence against women: The Partner Violence Acceptability Movie Task. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Waltermaurer, E. Public justification of intimate partner violence: A review of the literature. Trauma Violence Abuse 2012, 13, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brandt, M.J. Sexism and gender in equality across 57 societies. Psychol. Sci. 2011, 22, 1413–1418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Herrero, J.; Rodríguez, F.J.; Torres, A. Acceptability of partner violence in 51 societies: The role of sexism and attitudes toward violence in social relationships. Violence Against Women 2017, 23, 351–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Herrero, J.; Torres, A.; Rodríguez, F.J.; Juarros-Basterretxea, J. Intimate partner violence against women in the European Union: The influence of male partners’ traditional gender roles and general violence. Psychol. Violence 2017, 7, 385–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uthman, O.A.; Moradi, T.; Lawoko, S. The independent contribution of individual, neighbourhood, and country-level socioeconomic position on attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women in sub-Saharan Africa: A multilevel model of direct and moderating effects. Soc. Sci. Med. 2009, 68, 1801–1809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bucheli, M.; Rossi, M. Attitudes toward intimate partner violence against women in Latin America and the Caribbean. Criminol. Crim. Justic. 2019, 9, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ivert, A.K.; Merlo, J.; Gracia, E. Country of residence, gender equality and victim blaming attitudes about partner violence: A multilevel analysis in EU. Eur. J. Public Health 2018, 28, 559–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tausch, A. Multivariate analyses of the global acceptability rates of male intimate partner violence (IPV) against women based on World Values Survey data. Int. J. Health Plann. Manage. 2019, 34, 1155–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Willis, C.; Delgado, R.H. Attitudes toward violence and gender as predictors of interpersonal violence interventions. J. Interpers. Violence 2020, 35, 809–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Violence against Women: An EU-Wide Survey. Main Results; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Domestic Violence against Women. Special Eurobarometer 73.2; TNS Opinión & Social: Brussels, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Ferrer-Pérez, V.A.; Bosch-Fiol, E. Gender Violence as a Social Problem in Spain: Attitudes and Acceptability. Sex Roles 2014, 70, 506–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin-Fernandez, M.; Gracia, E.; Marco, M.; Vargas, V.; Santirso, F.A.; Lila, M. Measuring acceptability of intimate partner violence against women: Development and validation of the A-IPVAW Scale. Eur. J. Psychol. Appl. L. 2018, 10, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martín-Fernández, M.; Gracia, E.; Lila, M. Assessing victim-blaming attitudes in cases of intimate partner violence against women: Development and validation of the VB-IPVAW scale. Interv. Psicosoc. 2018, 27, 133–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fincham, F.D.; Cui, M.; Braithwaite, S.; Pasley, K. Attitudes towards intimate partner violence in dating relationships. Psychol. Assess. 2008, 20, 260–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gracia, E.; Tomás, J.M. Correlates of victim-blaming attitudes regarding partner violence against women among the Spanish general population. Violence Against Women 2014, 20, 26–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Worden, A.P.; Carlsson, B.E. Attitudes and beliefs about domestic violence: Results of a public opinion survey II. Beliefs about causes. J. Interpers. Violence 2005, 20, 1219–1243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arënliu, A.; Kelmendi, K.; Bërxulli, D. Socio-demographic associates of tolerant attitudes toward intimate partner violence against women in Kosovo. Soc. Sci. J. 2019, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khawaja, M.; Linos, N.; El-Roueiheb, Z. Attitude of men and women toward wife beating: Findings from Palestinian refugee camps in Jordan. J. Fam. Violence 2007, 23, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- VicHealth (2010). National Survey on Community attitudes to Violence against Women 2009. Changing Cultures, Changing Attitudes—Preventing Violence against Women. A Summary of Findings; Victorian Health Promotion Foundation: Carlton, Australia, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Garaigordobil, M. Sexism and empathy: Differences as a function of sociodemographic variables and relations between both constructs. In Advances in Psychology Research; Columbus, A.M., Ed.; Nova Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 59–80. [Google Scholar]
- Garaigordobil, M.; Aliri, J. Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Standardization and normative data in a sample of the basque country. Psicol. Conduct. 2013, 21, 173–186. [Google Scholar]
- Hammond, M.D.; Milojev, P.; Huang, Y.; Sibley, C.G. Benevolent sexism and hostile sexism across the ages. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 2017, 9, 863–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rani, M.; Bonu, S. Attitudes toward wife beating: A cross-country study in Asia. J. Interpers. Violence 2009, 24, 1371–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ferragut, M.; Blanca, M.J.; Ortiz-Tallo, M.; Bendayan, R. Sexist attitudes and beliefs during adolescence: A longitudinal study of gender differences. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2017, 14, 32–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pastor, Y.; Pascual, E.; Muñoz, J.J.; Martínez-Bravo, S. Wording effect in the measurement of attitudes towards dating violence. Interv. Psicosoc. 2020, 29, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eckhardt, C.I.; Samper, R.; Suhr, L.; Holtzworth-Munroe, A. Implicit attitudes towards violence among male perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A preliminary investigation. J. Interpers. Violence 2012, 27, 471–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Houwer, J.; Teige-Mocigemba, S.; Spruyt, A.; Moors, A. Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychol. Bull 2009, 135, 347–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Fazio, R.H.; Olson, M.A. Implicit measures in social cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2003, 54, 297–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nosek, B.A. Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 2005, 134, 565–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nosek, B.A.; Hawkins, C.B.; Frazier, R.S. Implicit social cognition: From measures to mechanisms. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2011, 15, 152–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ryan, K.M. Issues of reliability in measuring intimate partner violence during courtship. Sex Roles 2013, 69, 131–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, K.; Straus, M. Denial, minimization, partner blaming, and intimate aggression in dating partners. J. Interpers. Violence 2007, 22, 851–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenwald, A.G.; Nosek, B.A. Health of the Implicit Association Test at age 3. Z. Exp. Psychol. 2001, 48, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hummert, M.L.; Garstka, T.A.; O’Brien, L.T.; Greenwald, A.G.; Mellott, D.S. Using the implicit association test to measure age differences in implicit social cognitions. Psychol. Aging 2002, 17, 482–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nosek, B.A.; Greenwald, A.G.; Banaji, M.R. The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review de Automatic processes in social thinking and behavior. In Automatic Processes in Social Thinking and Behavior; Psychology Press: London, UK, 2007; pp. 265–292. [Google Scholar]
- Tosi, J.D.; Ledesma, R.D.; Poó, F.M.; Montes, S.A.; López, S.S. El Test de Asociaciones Implícitas. Una Revisión Metodológica [The Implicit Association Test. A Methodological Review]. Rev. Iberoam. Diagn. Ev. 2018, 46, 175–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenwald, A.G.; McGhee, D.E.; Schwartz, J.K.L. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1998, 74, 1464–1480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stewart, B.D.; von Hippel, W.; Radvansky, G.A. Age, race, and implicit prejudice using process dissociation to separate the underlying components. Psychol. Sci. 2009, 20, 164–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wrzus, C.; Egloff, B.; Riediger, M. Using Implicit Association Tests in Age- Heterogeneous Samples: The Importance of Cognitive Abilities and Quad Model Processes. Psychol. Aging 2017, 32, 432–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenwald, A.G.; Nosek, B.A.; Banaji, M.R. Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: I. An Improved Scoring Algorithm. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2003, 85, 197–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gonsalkolare, K.; Sherman, J.W.; Klauer, K.C. Aging and prejudice: Diminished regulation of automatic race bias among older adults. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2009, 45, 410–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crano, W.D.; Prislin, R. Frontiers of social psychology. In Attitudes and Attitude Change; Psychology Press: London, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Hofmann, W.; Gawronski, B.; Gschwendner, T.; Le, H.; Schmitt, M. A meta-analysis on the correlation between the Implicit Association Test and explicit self-report measures. Pers. Soc. Psychol. B. 2005, 31, 1369–1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kurdi, B.; Banaji, M.R. Relationship between the Implicit Association Test and Explicit Measures of Intergroup Cognition: Data from the Meta-Analysis by Kurdi et al. (2018). Available online: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vpcx8 (accessed on 22 April 2019).
- Echeburúa, E.; Fernández-Montalvo, J. Hombres maltratadores. Aspectos teóricos [Batterer men. Theoretical aspects]. In Manual de Violencia Familiar [Family Violence Manual]; Echeburua, E., Fernandez-Montalvo, J., Eds.; Siglo XXI: Madrid, Spain, 1998; pp. 73–90. [Google Scholar]
- Ferrer-Pérez, V.A.; Bosch-Fiol, E.; Sánchez-Prada, A.; Delgado-Álvarez, C. Beliefs and attitudes about intimate partner violence against women in Spain. Psicothema 2019, 31, 38–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Ael, C.; Recio, P.; Silván-Ferrero, P. Psychometric Properties of the Inventory of Beliefs about Intimate Partner Violence (IBIPV). An. Psicol. 2018, 34, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Prada, A.; Delgado-Álvarez, C.; Bosch-Fiol, E.; Ferreiro-Basurto, V.; Ferrer-Pérez, V.A. Measurement of supportive attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women among a Spanish-speaker sample. PLoS ONE 2020. under review. [Google Scholar]
- Saunders, D.G.; Lynch, A.B.; Grayson, M.; Linz, D. The inventory of beliefs about wife beating: The construction and initial validation of a measure of beliefs and attitudes. Violence Vict. 1987, 2, 39–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ferrer-Pérez, V.A.; Bosch-Fiol, E.; Ferrerio-Basurto, V.; Sánchez-Prada, A.; Delgado-Álvarez, C. Can we apply the Implicit Association Test to measure attitudes towards intimate partner? Psicol. Reflex. Crít. 2020. under review. [Google Scholar]
- Ferrer-Perez, V.A.; Bosch-Fiol, E.; Ferreiro-Basurto, V.; Delgado-Alvarez, C.; Sanchez-Prada, A. Comparing implicit and explicit attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women. Front. Psychol. 2020. accepted. [Google Scholar]
- Sánchez-Prada, A.; Delgado-Álvarez, C.; Ferrer-Perez, V.A.; Bosch-Fiol, E. Implicit and Explicit Attitudes Towards Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: An Exploratory Study. J. Interpers. Violence 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Organic Act 1/2004 on Integral Protection Measures against Gender Violence; Boletín Oficial del Estado núm: Madrid, Spain; pp. 42166–42197.
- Nosek, B.A.; Bar-Anan, Y.; Sriram, N.; Axt, J.; Greenwald, A.G. Understanding and Using the Brief Implicit Association Test: Recommended Scoring Procedures. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e110938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Richetin, J.; Costantini, G.; Perugini, M.; Schönbrodt, F. Should We Stop Looking for a Better Scoring Algorithm for Handling Implicit Association Test Data? Test of the Role of Errors, Extreme Latencies Treatment, Scoring Formula, and Practice Trials on Reliability and Validity. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0129601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kurdi, B.; Seitchik, A.E.; Axt, J.R.; Carroll, T.J.; Karapetyan, A.; Kaushik, N.; Tomezsko, D.; Greenwald, A.G.; Banaji, M.R. Relationship between the Implicit Association Test and intergroup behavior: A meta-analysis. Am. Psychol. 2019, 74, 569–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schmukle, S.C.; Egloff, B. Does the Implicit Association Test for assessing anxiety measure trait and state variance? Eur. J. Personality 2004, 18, 483–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrer-Perez, V.A.; Bosch, E. Levels of Prevention of Intimate Partner Violence against Women Analyzed from the Multi-Causal-Ecological Pyramidal Model: The Case of Spain in Domestic Violence in International Context; Bruns, D.L., Schroeder, J.A., Eds.; Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Martínez-Ten, C.; Gutierrez, P.; González, P. El movimiento feminista en España en los años 70 [The feminist movement in Spain in the 70]; Cátedra–Fundación Pablo Iglesias: Madrid, Spain, 2009. [Google Scholar]
<18 Years (n = 50) | 18–29 Years (n = 50) | 30–59 years (n = 50) | ≥60 Years (n = 50) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age | Mean SD Range | 16.60 0.50 16–17 | 19.82 2.30 18–27 | 41.64 9.99 30–59 | 68.58 5.30 60–82 |
Gender | Men Women | 25 (50%) 25 (50%) | 25 (50%) 25 (50%) | 16 (32%) 34 (68%) | 25 (50%) 25 (50%) |
IPDMV Dimensions | Group | Mean | SD | χ2 (3 df) | p | Homogeneous Sets 1 Set 1 Set 2 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1-IW: Inferiority of Women Compared to Men | <18 | 1.11 | 0.29 | 18.717 | <0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.02 | 0.08 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.01 | 0.05 | 30–59 | ||||
≥ 60 | 1.11 | 0.19 | ≥60 | ||||
F2-BW: Blaming Female Victims of Abuse | <18 | 1.64 | 0.41 | 26.873 | <0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.41 | 0.31 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.32 | 0.25 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 1.67 | 0.45 | ≥60 | ||||
F3-VP: Violence as an Appropriate Problem-solving Strategy | <18 | 1.59 | 0.51 | 12.720 | 0.005 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.49 | 0.56 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.30 | 0.40 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 1.56 | 0.51 | ≥60 | ||||
F4-MA: Minimization and Exoneration of the Abuser | <18 | 2.18 | 0.67 | 16.137 | <0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.84 | 0.53 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.80 | 0.64 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 2.22 | 0.71 | ≥60 |
IBIPV Dimensions | Group | Mean | SD | χ2 (3df) | p | Homogeneous Sets 1 Set 1 Set 2 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1-JPV: Justifying Partner Violence | <18 | 1.38 | 0.62 | 31.411 | <0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.08 | 0.25 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.05 | 0.18 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 1.54 | 0.98 | ≥60 | ||||
F2-VRV: Victim Responsible for Violence | <18 | 1.36 | 0.72 | 15.883 | 0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.08 | 0.20 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.09 | 0.25 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 1.48 | 1.14 | ≥60 | ||||
F3-ARV: Abuser Responsible for Violence | <18 | 2.80 | 1.51 | 11.965 | 0.008 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.94 | 1.54 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 2.19 | 1.25 | 30–59 | 30–59 | |||
≥60 | 2.90 | 2.31 | ≥60 | ≥60 |
Group | Estimated Mean (SD) | F (3, 196) | p | η2 | 1-β | Homogeneous Sets 1 Set 1 Set 2 | ||
ANOVA | <18 | 0.61 (0.045) | 9.507 | <0.001 | 0.127 | 0.997 | <18 | |
18–29 | 0.66 (0.045) | 18–29 | ||||||
30–59 | 0.77 (0.045) | 30–59 | 30–59 | |||||
≥60 | 0.92 (0.045) | ≥60 | ||||||
Group | Estimated Mean (SD) | F (3, 195) | p | η2 | 1-β | Homogeneous Sets 1 Set 1 Set 2 | ||
ANCOVA | <18 | 0.62 (0.046) | 4.413 | 0.005 | 0.064 | 0.870 | <18 | |
18–29 | 0.69 (0.047) | 18–29 | 18–29 | |||||
30–59 | 0.77 (0.045) | 30–59 | 30–59 | |||||
≥60 | 0.88 (0.053) | ≥60 | ||||||
Covariate RLi (Value 2121.88) | 2.316 | 0.130 | 0.012 | 0.328 |
Frequency | Group | Mean | SD | χ2 (3df) | p | Homogeneous Sets 1 Set 1 Set 2 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Psychological abuse | <18 | 3.26 | 0.67 | 25.644 | <0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 3.58 | 0.54 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 3.65 | 0.52 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 3.10 | 0.65 | ≥60 | ||||
Physical aggression | <18 | 3.16 | 0.65 | 7.224 | 0.065 | ||
18–29 | 3.12 | 0.58 | |||||
30–59 | 3.26 | 0.77 | |||||
≥60 | 2.90 | 0.72 | |||||
Sexual abuse | <18 | 3.08 | 0.72 | 3.800 | 0.284 | ||
18–29 | 3.22 | 0.82 | |||||
30–59 | 3.16 | 0.77 | |||||
≥60 | 2.94 | 0.81 | |||||
Violence threats | <18 | 3.24 | 0.56 | 16.137 | 0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 3.40 | 0.67 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 3.46 | 0.65 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 2.94 | 0.63 | ≥60 | ||||
Freedom restrictions | <18 | 3.06 | 0.84 | 18.801 | <0.001 | <18 | <18 |
18–29 | 3.32 | 0.74 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 3.38 | 0.78 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 2.86 | 0.74 | ≥60 |
Severity | Group | Mean | SD | χ2 (3 df) | p | Homogeneous Sets 1 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 2 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Psychological abuse | <18 | 3.62 | 0.57 | 18.801 | <0.001 | <18 | <18 | |
18–29 | 3.78 | 0.42 | 18–29 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 3.88 | 0.33 | 30–59 | |||||
≥60 | 3.45 | 0.61 | ≥60 | |||||
Physical aggressions | <18 | 3.84 | 0.37 | 13.527 | 0.004 | <18 | <18 | |
18–29 | 3.94 | 0.24 | 18–29 | |||||
30–59 | 3.96 | 0.20 | 30–59 | |||||
≥60 | 3.72 | 0.50 | ≥60 | |||||
Sexual abuse | <18 | 3.92 | 0.34 | 14.838 | 0.002 | <18 | ||
18–29 | 3.94 | 0.24 | 18–29 | |||||
30–59 | 3.96 | 0.20 | 30–59 | |||||
≥60 | 3.73 | 0.49 | ≥60 | |||||
Violence threats | <18 | 3.56 | 0.58 | 15.844 | 0.001 | <18 | ||
18–29 | 3.78 | 0.47 | 18–29 | |||||
30–59 | 3.80 | 0.45 | 30–59 | |||||
≥60 | 3.49 | 0.50 | ≥60 | |||||
Freedom restrictions | <18 | 3.58 | 0.64 | 9.683 | 0.021 | <18 | ||
18–29 | 3.78 | 0.47 | 18–29 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 3.84 | 0.37 | 30–59 | |||||
≥60 | 3.57 | 0.58 | ≥60 |
Group | Mean | SD | χ2 (3df) | p | Homogeneous Sets 1 Set 1 Set 2 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Laws to punish | <18 | 1.68 | 0.56 | 11.601 | 0.009 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.40 | 0.79 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.57 | 0.69 | 30–59 | 30–59 | |||
≥60 | 1.89 | 0.96 | ≥60 | ||||
Victim protection | <18 | 1.40 | 0.79 | 18.706 | <0.001 | <18 | |
18–29 | 1.63 | 0.86 | 18–29 | ||||
30–59 | 1.50 | 0.55 | 30–59 | ||||
≥60 | 1.93 | 0.81 | ≥60 |
Explicit (IPDMV and IBIPV Dimensions) and Implicit Measures | Gender | Mean | SD | Z | p |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1-IW: Inferiority of Women Compared to Men | Men Woman | 1.130 1.003 | 0.294 0.020 | −4.165 | <0.001 |
F2-BW: Blaming Female Victims of Abuse | Men Woman | 1.620 1.426 | 0.404 0.332 | −2.470 | 0.013 |
F3-VP Violence Appropriate Problem-solving Strategy | Men Woman | 1.652 1.424 | 0.577 0.474 | −2.165 | 0.030 |
F4-MA Minimization and Exoneration of the Abuser | Men Woman | 2.180 1.840 | 0.631 0.581 | −2.842 | 0.004 |
F1-JPV Justifying Partner Violence | Men Woman | 1.348 1.112 | 0.564 0.375 | −3.088 | 0.002 |
F2-VRV Victims Responsible for Violence | Men Woman | 1.358 1.082 | 0.716 0.200 | −2.717 | 0.007 |
F3-ARV Abuser Responsible for Violence | Men Woman | 2.844 1.896 | 1.787 1.174 | −2.777 | 0.005 |
GV-IAT Implicit Rejection of Gender Violence | Men Woman | 0.619 0.652 | 0.287 0.285 | −0.789 | 0.430 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sánchez-Prada, A.; Delgado-Alvarez, C.; Bosch-Fiol, E.; Ferreiro-Basurto, V.; Ferrer-Perez, V.A. Psychosocial Implications of Supportive Attitudes towards Intimate Partner Violence against Women throughout the Lifecycle. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6055. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176055
Sánchez-Prada A, Delgado-Alvarez C, Bosch-Fiol E, Ferreiro-Basurto V, Ferrer-Perez VA. Psychosocial Implications of Supportive Attitudes towards Intimate Partner Violence against Women throughout the Lifecycle. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(17):6055. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176055
Chicago/Turabian StyleSánchez-Prada, Andrés, Carmen Delgado-Alvarez, Esperanza Bosch-Fiol, Virginia Ferreiro-Basurto, and Victoria A. Ferrer-Perez. 2020. "Psychosocial Implications of Supportive Attitudes towards Intimate Partner Violence against Women throughout the Lifecycle" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 17: 6055. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176055