Next Article in Journal
Sociological Analysis of Abortion Perceptions: The Case of Young Women in Split, Croatia
Previous Article in Journal
Red Tourism and Youth Education: A Systematic Review of the Literature
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Societies
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/soc15030070
societies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Attitudes Regarding Gender Roles and Recurrence of Dating Violence in Spanish and Mexican Adolescents

by
María de la Villa Moral-Jiménez
*,
Aitana Alvarez-Menéndez
and
Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Díaz
Faculty of Psychology, University of Oviedo, 33003 Oviedo, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Societies 2025, 15(3), 70; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15030070
Submission received: 19 December 2024 / Revised: 1 March 2025 / Accepted: 11 March 2025 / Published: 13 March 2025
Versions Notes

Abstract

Gender-based violence is recognized as both a violation of human rights and a significant public health problem due to its widespread prevalence. Gender-based violence has also been shown to be associated with sexist beliefs. Furthermore, cultural background significantly influences how individuals develop attitudes toward gender roles. This study aims to examine the recurrence of dating violence among young couples in relation to their cultural context. The study involved 9759 participants (40.85% women and 59.15% men) with an age range between 13 and 26 years (M = 18.1, SD = 2.32) residing in either Spain (67.28%) or Mexico (32.72%). Participants completed two questionnaires: the Dating Violence Questionnaire (CUVINO) and the Role Attitudes Scale of Gender (GRAS). Gender-based violence was more recurrent in the Spanish context, especially among women. Spanish participants also held more stereotypical gender role attitudes than Mexican participants, with evidence linking these attitudes to higher rates of gender violence. It is confirmed that an issue as complex as gender violence in dating relationships is influenced by multiple determining factors, including cultural context.

1. Introduction

Violence against women, especially sexual and intimate partner violence, is considered by the World Health Organization [1] as a public health problem that affects one in three women at some point in their lives. In Spain, according to Organic Law 1/2004 on Comprehensive Protection Measures against Gender Violence [2], the term gender violence is used to refer to a manifestation of discrimination, as well as the situation of inequality, in the power relations of men over women. In most cases, the person who perpetrates this violence is their partner, so that 27% of women between the ages of 15 and 49, who have been in a relationship, claim to have suffered physical and/or sexual violence from their partner [3]. Specifically, according to the Pan American Health Organization and the WHO itself [1], it is estimated that 30% of women in the region of the Americas have suffered physical or sexual violence at the hands of their partners. In Mexico, according to data from the National Institute of Statistics and Geography, 70.1% of all women aged 15 years and over have experienced at least one incident of violence, which can include psychological, economic, patrimonial, physical, sexual, or discriminatory [4]. It should be noted that the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) is even higher in adolescents than in adults [5], with 24% of adolescents aged 15 to 19 having experienced physical and/or sexual violence from their partners [6].
Violent acts in dating relationships between adolescents or young people have hardly been the subject of research until a few decades ago [7,8,9]. Currently, we can observe a growing interest in this phenomenon among researchers which is reflected in the increase in publications around descriptors such as “dating violence”, a term that is more appropriate for this age group than others such as “domestic violence” [10]. Dating violence is a type of interpersonal violence that is inflicted in an intimate relationship and causes psychological, physical, and sexual harm [11,12,13]. Reference is made to the very vulnerable stages in which the first courtships are established, and it is estimated that these love experiences will play a relevant role in subsequent ones.
Despite the growing research interest in and the dissemination of these issues, a recurring challenge is the difficulty many individuals have in identifying themselves as victims of gender-based violence. Even when they admit to having experienced violence there is a tendency to normalize the situation, which hinders awareness of the problem and subsequent intervention [14]. This ongoing challenge coincides with the fact that intimate violence is an increased problem in both Spain [7,11,15] and in Mexico [16,17,18]. Thus, according to the results of the National Survey of Violence in Dating Relationships (ENVIN) [19], 15.5% of Mexicans between the ages of 15 and 24 years old who are in a relationship have been victims of physical violence and 75.8% have suffered psychological attacks [20]. Similarly, the National Survey on the Dynamics of Household Relationships 2021 (ENDIREH) [4] in Mexico found that 19.9% of participants experienced emotional violence in a dating relationship during the past year, with 2.7% also reporting physical violence and 2% sexual violence.
When analyzing the etiological factors of gender violence, various theories are proposed, ranging from individualistic to sociocultural perspectives. However, the most widely accepted theory is Heise’s [21] ecological framework, which posits that multiple interrelated personal, situational, and sociocultural factors influence gender violence. This framework includes four levels of analysis: individual, microsystem, exosystem, and macrosystem [22]. The individual level includes aspects of personality and personal experience, such as witnessing marital violence in childhood, experiencing childhood abuse, or facing rejection. The microsystem refers to the interaction between individuals, where male dominance can be observed within family or couple dynamics. The exosystem refers to formal and informal social structures such as, for example, the isolation of women in society. Finally, the macrosystem, which is of particular interest in this study, focuses on analyzing the overarching values and beliefs that influence other levels such as rigid gender roles [23].
Gender-based violence, including dating violence, is closely related to sexist beliefs that sometimes claim that the dominance of men over women is justified [22]. Sexism is understood as an attitude directed toward people based on their membership of groups on the basis of sex or gender, and any evaluation of a person in relation to their biological sex can be considered a sexist attitude [24]. These sexist socialization patterns are transmitted from one generation to the next through inadequate education or behavior patterns that boys and girls tend to copy, such as patriarchal systems [5]. The assimilation of these gender roles contributes to the justification of violence and leads to the normalization of gender violence [25]. Traditional hostile sexism towards women has been evolving into a slightly more subtle form of discrimination. Currently, the term “ambivalent sexism” is used to refer to a two-dimensional construct consisting of two related components: hostile sexism and benevolent sexism. According to Arbach et al. [26], hostile sexism has a more classical perspective in which an image of a weak and inferior woman is constructed in relation to men, i.e., negative attitudes towards women. Instead, benevolent sexism restricts women to certain roles such as mother, wife, or housewife, and emphasizes their weakness and need for protection from a man from a romantic perspective. We could say that this last form of sexism somewhat masks underlying sexist attitudes, yet it is equally detrimental to the affective attainment of equality. It continues to conceal the traditional dominance of men, but its affective tone does not evoke the same rejection as hostile attitudes do [27].
In dating violence, as a result of such manifestations, women’s self-perception of emotional health is altered, as well as their perception of victimization and the tolerance thresholds for abuse [11] There are a series of precursors which contribute to sustaining this type of relationship, some being psychopathological or sociodemographic in nature. Among those of a psychosocial nature, there are gender roles and attitudes regarding the concept of love, as well as intimacy control behaviors. Specifically, abuse for control is defined as a set of behaviors that are carried out by invading the intimacy of a couple in order to obtain information about them and to promote the maintenance of the relationship [28].
Through a review of the specialized literature on the subject in the Spanish university population, it has been confirmed that, even with medium–low overall levels of ambivalent sexism, the differences between the two sexes were notable, with men scoring significantly higher than women [29,30]. Men have also been found to have more sexist attitudes and higher levels of gender stereotypes [31]. In turn, men seem to be less sensitive to the emotional or social consequences of violence [32]. In this vein, Yanes and González [33] found that young Spanish individuals with a more conservative and traditional view of gender roles tended to hold women more responsible and exhibit more violent behavior toward their partners. Similarly, there is evidence that the most religious people tend to be more in line with traditional roles, confirming that these religious beliefs are associated with more benevolent, but not more hostile, attitudes [27]. Educational level is also strongly related to attitudes towards violence against women; those with higher levels of education tended to blame women less and justify violence to a lesser extent [33]. In addition, parents who do not go beyond primary education influence their children to adopt more traditional gender roles, especially men, who try to imitate male models in search of social recognition. This can be problematic given that the behaviors typically associated with masculinity are often more sexist than those traditionally associated with femininity [34].
At a more macro-contextual level, the influence of culture on the formation and maintenance of attitudes toward gender-based violence, shaped by one’s context of origin or place of residence, is evident [35]. In this way, gender socialization patterns based on cultural identities and values determine, to a large extent, this type of violent manifestation. In particular, studies in Latin American countries, such as those by Giraldo et al. [36], highlight patriarchal upbringing as a key cultural factor. An assessment of patriarchal and sexist beliefs among Mexican university students with favorable attitudes toward physical, psychological, and sexual violence concluded that men present more permissive attitudes toward dating violence [37]. Rodríguez et al. [38] concluded that both genders are victimized in dating relationships. Although women reported greater perceived family support, this perception was only weakly associated with victimization because women tended to conceal episodes of physical and sexual violence. In young Mexicans, it has been confirmed that mutual violence is the most common form of dating violence [39].
In light of the above, the purpose of this study is to examine attitudes toward gender roles in different cultural contexts and their relationship to manifestations of gender violence in young couples. In this case, a cross-cultural study has been carried out taking into account the geographical location of two countries: Spain and Mexico. Additionally, the study examines whether belonging to a particular cultural context, and consequently developing specific beliefs about gender roles, is related to the recurrence of gender violence within that specific context. That is, whether there are differences in the repetition of such manifestations in dating relationships according to the beliefs developed in that culture. This study also proposes to analyze the subjects’ attitudes regarding gender roles and study the relationship between these variables.
Therefore, we propose the following research hypotheses to be tested: (H1) There will be statistically significant differences in the repetition of gender violence depending on the cultural context. (H2) Women will be the ones who admit to experiencing or having experienced violent behavior more repeatedly. (H3) The repetition of gender violence by contextual variables, with less repetition of manifestations of gender violence manifesting in more egalitarian cultures.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

Using a non-probabilistic sample, 9514 participants were selected between the ages of 13 and 26, with an average age of 18.1 years (SD = 2.32), 59.15% of whom were female (n = 5628). The main inclusion criterion when forming the sample was that the participants were in a heterosexual relationship at the time of completing the questionnaires. The study focused on dating violence in heterosexual relationships because the version of the instrument that evaluates dating violence established this as a criterion. The analysis of homosexual couples exceeds the objectives of this study. We advocate for the construction and application of instruments that are inclusive of sexual orientation diversity, although in Spanish they are scarce [40].
Regarding geographical affiliation, 67.28% (n = 6401) were resident in Spain and 32.72% (n = 3113) in Mexico. A total of 99.75% (n = 9491) of the participants were students: 54.03% (n = 5128) were in secondary or high school, 15.51% (n = 1472) were in vocational training, and 30.46% (n = 2891) were university students; the remaining 0.25% (n = 23) had not completed their studies. Similarly, only 13.44% (n = 1279) of the participants worked. In terms of their perceived social class, the majority of participants (91.95%; n = 8748) considered themselves to be middle class (see Table 1).

2.2. Measurement and Instruments

A battery of tests was administered that included basic data about the person being evaluated and their stable partner (relationship longer than one month) through the application of the Dating Violence Questionnaire (CUVINO) and the Gender Role Attitudes Scale (GRAS).
Dating Violence Questionnaire—CUVINO—[25,41]. An instrument for the assessment of victimization in dating relationships specifically designed for adolescents and teenagers. It is made up of 42 behavioral indicators evaluated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (0: never/not at all to 4: almost always/a lot) grouped into eight factors or ways of exercising violence in the relationship: Detachment, Humiliation, Sexual, Coercion, Physical, Gender, Emotional, and Instrumental Punishment, whose factorial structure has been additionally confirmed in North American, Latin American, and Italian samples [42,43] and shows high reliability for the entire scale (α = 0.932). Our study focuses only on the subscale that refers to the gender factor which consists of 5 items: item 3 (“Makes fun of women and men in general”), 11 (“Acts/thinks that those of the other sex are inferior”), 19 (“He has ridiculed or insulted women or men”), 27 (“Discredits your condition as a man/woman”), and 35 (“Criticizes your sexuality”). Specifically, given our research interest, in this manuscript we have presented the results related to the application of this subscale.
Gender Role Attitudes Scale -GRAS- [44]. Consisting of 20 items on attitudes related to the roles assigned to men and women in society, this facilitates the identification of aggressive behavior in emotional relationships. Each item has five response alternatives (from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree), grouped into transcendent or egalitarian attitudes, sexist attitudes, identifying the gender role to be played in society on equality (e.g., “People should be treated equally, regardless of the sex to which they belong”) or sexism in social functions (e.g., “I think it is more unfortunate to see a man cry than a woman”), work (e.g., “Only some types of work are appropriate for both men and women”), and family (e.g., “Mothers should make most of the decisions about how to raise children”). The scale offers a unidimensional and bipolar structure, where the lowest scores represent transcendent attitudes and the highest stereotyped attitudes [45]. The original test offers an internal consistency of 0.99.

2.3. Procedures

The results presented here are part of a wider research project that is the result of collaboration between a team of researchers from different Spanish universities and other Mexican researchers. Standardized procedures were common to both geographic locations. The total sample was obtained over a period of two years, in Secondary Education Centers and Universities of A Coruña, Oviedo, Seville, Huelva, Madrid, and Valencia in the case of Spain, and Guadalajara, Mérida, and Puebla in the case of Mexico. Access to the sample population was deliberate, depending on the availability of participants in the educational centers collaborating in the project. Specifically, the statistical tests were applied in person by different researchers and doctoral students trained in the field. Participants were provided with a definition of what is meant by abusive affective interpersonal relationships during courtship and by the researchers of the team trained for this purpose and who participated in the application of the scales. In addition, basic instructions were provided on how to respond to the Likert scales and participants were encouraged to ask any questions they might have about the procedure or the content of the items. In accordance with the ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, informed consent was obtained from all participants and, in the case of minors, from their parents or guardians. Confidentiality and anonymity were maintained and guaranteed at all times. Data were collected anonymously and exclusively for research purposes, as indicated to the participants at the beginning of the form, in accordance with the ethical standards of the American Psychological Association [46].

2.4. Research Design

This study used a quantitative statistical design that is observational, descriptive, and cross-sectional. It aims to analyze the characteristics of a population through measurements and to determine the values of the variables of interest at a given point in time, without manipulating or controlling any of these variables.

2.5. Data Analysis

First, the data were tabulated in the form of a structured database and subsequently analyzed using the Jamovi statistical program (version 2. 3. 26. 0). Initially, an evaluation of the reliability of both scales was carried out with the aim of checking their internal consistency. For this, Cronbach’s alpha was used (>0.70), while at the same time checks were conducted on whether the reliability of the scales would improve or worsen by eliminating any item.
Next, a normality test was performed to quantify the discrepancy between the distribution of the observed data and a theoretical normal distribution that had the same centrality and dispersion parameters. In order to evaluate it, a non-parametric test was used, namely the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (p < 0.05), since, having a sample larger than 5000 subjects, it is more appropriate compared with other types of tests, for example, the Shapiro–Wilk. At the same time, the variables to be formed for data analysis were created, adding the items of the scales to observe the total scores of both. In this way and taking into account the non-normal results obtained, the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U test and the Cohen’s d effect size were used to compare the differences between the different cultural contexts and genders of the sample.

3. Results

First, the internal consistency of the tests used in this study was analyzed. Thus, the Dating Violence Questionnaire (CUVINO) in the gender subscale obtained high internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha being 0.992. All items appeared to be relevant, since their elimination did not increase the reliability of the subscale. Similarly, the Gender Role Attitudes Scale (GRAS) showed high internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.920 that also presents high internal consistency.
Once the reliability of both scales was verified, the normality test was performed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. This test yielded p < 0.001 for both scales, which implies that the data do not follow a normal distribution.

3.1. Gender Violence According to Cultural Context

In the first hypothesis of this study, it was proposed that the repetition of gender violence would vary depending on the cultural context. To test this hypothesis, the total score of the applied scale of the Dating Violence Questionnaire was calculated. The results showed that the average score was higher in Spain (Md = 18, Range = 24) than in Mexico (Md = 17, Range = 24), so that using the Mann–Whitney U test confirmed that these differences were statistically significant and had a small effect size U (n1 = 6070, n2 = 3129) = 8 × 103 + 6, p < 0.001, d = 0.203. Therefore, it was concluded that there is greater repetition of violent behavior in the Spanish cultural context (see Table 2).

3.2. Reiteration of Violent Behavior According to Gender

In the second hypothesis, it was proposed that women would repeatedly report suffering more repetitions of violent behavior. Based on the results presented in Table 3, women (Md = 20, Range = 24) obtained a higher score than men (Md = 12, Range = 24) and, based on the Mann–Whitney U test, it was proven that there are significant differences between both groups, with a large effect size U(n1 = 3714, n2 = 5485) = 4 × 103 + 6, p < 0.001, d = 1.068.

3.3. Gender Role Attitudes by Cultural Context

Finally, the existence of statistically significant differences in the incidence of gender violence based on attitudes was assessed, taking into account the total scores of the Gender Role Attitudes Scale, which were compared in the two cultural contexts (Mexico and Spain). The results indicate that participants from Spain (Md = 61, Range = 75) present more stereotypical attitudes than those from Mexico (Md = 55, Range = 67). According to the Mann–Whitney U test, it was confirmed that there were significant differences between both groups with a large effect size U (n1 = 4623, n2 = 3129) = 4.70 e + 6, p < 0.001, d = 0.623. Likewise, by comparing this result (see Table 4) with the previous findings presented in Table 3, a relationship can be established between the repetition of gender violence and the attitudes of a certain cultural context.

4. Discussion

This research provides us with an overview of the recurrence of gender violence in different cultural contexts and by gender. In addition, the main objective of this study was to examine the beliefs about gender roles that exist in different cultural contexts and to try to establish a relationship with the incidence of gender violence that exists in that context. Based on the results, it was confirmed that there was a greater repetition of violent behavior in the Spanish context than in the Mexican context. It was also found that women were the most frequent victims and that there was a relationship between attitudes towards gender roles and the incidence of gender violence, with Spanish participants showing more stereotypical attitudes and therefore a greater repetition of gender violence. In this way, we can highlight the importance of studying a variety of factors in order to understand a phenomenon as complex as gender violence, because although our results show clear patterns depending on the culture, attitudes, and gender of the participants, they also suggest the existence of nuances that require more detailed analysis.
Certainly, it is not possible to talk about gender violence in isolation without establishing relationships between collective and individual behaviors, between public and private, between community and family aspects, or without mentioning issues of affective dynamics in courtship relationships, the life history of both the victim and the perpetrator, patriarchal culture, or contextual values. In order to understand a phenomenon as complex as gender violence in young couples, we should not focus our attention solely on the event itself, but rather see that it is necessary to consider the context in which this conflict occurs [47]. Hence our research interest in conducting a comparative analysis based on phenomena that belong to the macrosystem, since society imposes its customs and beliefs on the individual [32]. According to hypothesis 3, the culture with more egalitarian attitudes will have a lower repetition of gender violence, so we do not study the differences between countries directly, but rather study whether there will be more repetitions of violence according to a type of belief. That is, whether a type of belief is more likely to lead to violent actions. Therefore, our objective is focused on relating the attitudes to violence in both contexts. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that in the study by García and Matud [48], in which Spanish and Mexican samples was related, as in the present research, it was found that gender violence is related to sociocultural patterns, so it was more common for Mexican women more frequently than Spanish women. On the other hand, a cross-cultural study with Spanish and Mexican adolescents found differences between the two countries in terms of control behaviors, which were higher in Mexico than in Spain [49]. As we mentioned earlier, what we expected in H3 was that the more egalitarian culture would have a greater repetition of violence, in this case Mexico, which is perhaps what we did not expect. This is justified through the argument that in Spain, due to the equality policies implemented in the last decades, there would be a greater awareness as well as a greater identification of the indicators of abusive affective relationships. Therefore, it could point to a greater awareness of such practices, which would lead to a greater tendency to recognize and denounce such abuses that could be more normalized among Mexican adolescents.
Furthermore, while Spain ranks among the lowest places in the international classification in terms of social violence and gender violence, Mexico ranks among one of the highest positions. In both countries, the experience of gender-based violence was associated with more traditional attitudes and less social support. This, along with access to health care, is recognized as a protective factor against becoming a victim of gender violence. On the other hand, while intimate partner violence in Mexico was independent of sociodemographic characteristics, in Spain it was associated with older age, a greater number of children, and a lower level of education. While Mexico has legislation addressing violence and inequality, it is still in the process of being updated. Consequently, there are recent gaps that need to be addressed for a more comprehensive approach to this issue [48]. According to Velázquez et al. [50], Mexico does not have a national coverage strategy for preventing and intervening against dating violence. Based on this argument, we could understand that perhaps the fact that more manifestations of violence in couple relationships have been reported in young Spaniards may not mean that more acts of violence of this type are committed, but rather that greater detection is based on visibility and social awareness. Without making generalizations, Latin culture is characterized by a traditional patriarchy and the assumption of very strong gender roles [36,51,52,53], which are risk factors when establishing an emotional relationship [11].
Although people present themselves to others as nonjudgmental subjects, it has been shown that a large part of the population continues to be sexist [29]. Being a belief system shaped by sociocultural and family contexts, this ideology has direct effects on the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes of both victims and perpetrators. In this way, beliefs make up ideological systems, among which sexism and patriarchal beliefs stand out [39]. If sexism were understood only as negative attitudes toward women, it would be difficult for them to continue to be maintained in more developed societies; however, there are subtle types of sexism by virtue of which normalized attitudes that are equally negative for women are generated [29]). In the study by Merma et al. [34], which used the same scale as that in the present study to measure gender role attitudes (GRAS), and which selected Spanish students for its sample, a medium level of sexism was observed, with men being 8.2% more sexist than women. Although the majority of these subjects believed that gender equality exists (94.3%), it was observed that, in more private environments such as the family, benevolent sexism persists, a result supported in other studies [31]. This suggests that in societies such as Spain, sexism continues to exist, although it manifests itself in a more subtle way.
Another study that defends a more sexist position on the part of men is that of Ullrich et al. [54]. The authors show that one of the most deeply rooted sexist attitudes in Spanish society is the presence of men and women in certain work areas. According to Merma et al. [34] it is very possible that gender stereotypes and sexist behaviors are already internalized in adolescence, so they would have been learned in childhood through family socialization mechanisms and in the school environment. Schools are a reflection of the patriarchal structures that perpetrate violence against women in society [48]. One of the most important studies on gender-based violence among university students that supports our findings is the International Dating Violence Study, which surveyed students from 32 countries. The results indicate a high prevalence of intimate partner violence, with more severe consequences particularly affecting women [32]. Among young university students, Flores and Barreto found that more than 70% of the women surveyed had experienced at least one episode of gender violence in their dating relationships. At the same time, it is claimed that more than half of the university students had suffered emotional violence, which, according to the National Survey on Dating Violence in Mexico [4], is the type of violence with the highest prevalence (39.04%) [37]. This leads to a decrease in self-confidence which makes it difficult for the victims to seek help. According to Zamudio et al. [32], the victims themselves do not confront the injustice, preferring to forget the matter, which reinforces the impunity that penetrates society.

Limitations and Future Lines

This study is not without limitations. One of them is the use of a cross-sectional design, which affects the scope of the conclusions that can be drawn from the study. Another is related to the representativeness of the selected sample, which may have introduced some bias in the results obtained. The impossibility of extrapolating the results due to the use of a non-probabilistic type of sampling must also be taken into account. Likewise, it is possible that there are biases in the results that are due to the social desirability of the participants themselves.
In short, this study provides us with a general vision of the recurrence of gender violence in young couples in different cultural contexts and according to gender. Based on the results, it has been confirmed that there is a greater repetition of violent behavior in the Spanish context compared with the Mexican one. It has also been found that women suffer violence more frequently and that there is a relationship between attitudes towards gender roles and the incidence of intimate partner violence, with Spanish participants showing more stereotypical attitudes and a greater repetition of gender-based sexual violence [7]. Similarly, studying young and adult Mexican and Colombian participants, Martínez-Gómez et al. [55] concluded that sexist attitudes, sexual double standards, and power dynamics are related to violence received and perpetrated among young and adult Mexican and Colombian participants. An interesting line of research of interest is to deepen the cross-cultural analysis, thus in a study on cyber violence against intimate partners among university students in seven Spanish-speaking countries, cultural differences are found in the perpetration of direct aggression and control, so that cyber violence correlates positively with sexist attitudes and distorted beliefs about romantic love [56].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, there are several implications, as both sociocultural contexts are witnessing increased efforts to address issues such as dating violence and online psychological and sexual harassment among young people by their partners or ex-partners. This is evident in Spain [5,42,57] and in Mexico [20,27,38,58]. In this way, we can highlight the importance of studying a multitude of determining and mediating factors in order to advance the comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon as complex as gender violence, focusing on the fact that at the level of attitudes, distinctive patterns emerge that vary according to the cultural context. In an ecological context, it would be appropriate to analyze intimate partner violence not only in individual dimensions, but also relational and socio-community contexts, studying attitudes toward violence, gender stereotypes and roles, and differential socialization and acculturation, among others.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.J.R.-D.; methodology, F.J.R.-D. and A.Á.; software, A.Á.; validation, M.d.l.V.M.-J. and F.J.R.-D.; formal analysis, J.R.-D. and A.Á.; investigation, M.d.l.V.M.-J. and A.Á.; resources, F.J.R.-D. and A.Á.; data curation, A.Á.; writing—original draft preparation, A.Á.; writing—review and editing, M.d.l.V.M.-J.; visualization, M.d.l.V.M.-J.; supervision, J.R.-D. and M.d.l.V.M.-J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was approved by the Department of Psychology of the University of Oviedo (Spain) (it does not assign individual codes) within the process of compliance for projects that opted to be defended as Final Theses in the academic year 2022–2023, as well as with the approval of the Tutor of the study. In studies with humans that do not apply treatments that may harm or affect the fundamental rights of participants (life, physical/mental integrity, health, freedom/autonomy in any of its manifestations, dignity of persons, etc.) and in which especially sensitive issues are not addressed, as in the case of our study, explicit approval is not required. In any case, the recommendations related to promoting good practice in research from the training stage, and to guarantee that the research complies with criteria of rigor, honesty, responsibility, freedom, respect and equality, risk prevention, and protection of people to promote responsible research, have been followed.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study, and confidentiality was maintained thoughout the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data are contained within the article and the recordings and raw datasets supporting the conclusions of this study will be made available by the corresponding author on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. World Health Organization. Violence Against Women; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  2. Council of Europe. Organic Law 1/2004 on Comprehensive Protection Measures Against Gender Violence. Available online: https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2004-21760#:~:text=La%20violencia%20de%20g%C3%A9nero%20a,la%20privaci%C3%B3n%20arbitraria%20de%20libertad (accessed on 19 March 2022).
  3. Adhanom, T. Violence Against Women Is Omnipresent: One in Three Women Suffres It. Available online: https://www.who.int/news/item/09-03-2021-devastatingly-pervasive-1-in-3-women-globally-experience-violence (accessed on 9 March 2021).
  4. National Institute of Statistics and Geography. National Survey on the Dynamics of Relationships in Homes (ENDIREH). 2021. Available online: https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/endireh/2021/ (accessed on 1 October 2024).
  5. García, V.; Fernández, A.; Bringas, C.; Rodríguez, F.J.; Lana, A. Tolerance of intimate partner violence and sexist attitudes among health sciences students from three Spanish universities. Gacet. San. 2020, 34, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Padrós, M.; Molina, S.; Gismero, E.; Tellado, I. Evidence of Gender Violence Negative Impact on Health as a Lever to Change Adolescents’ Attitudes and Preferences towards Dominant Traditional Masculinities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 9610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Moral, M.V.; García, A.; Cuetos, G.; Sirvent, C. Dating violence, emotional dependence and self-esteem in Spanish adolescents and young people. Rev. Iberoam. Psicol. Sal. 2017, 8, 96–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Reyes, P.; Soriano, A.; Martínez-Heredia, N.; González-Gijón, G. Descriptive analysis of publications on violence in relationships among Spanish adolescents enrolled in secondary education in recent years. iQual. Rev. Género Igual. 2024, 7, 120–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Rodríguez, L.; López, J.; Rodríguez, F.J.; Bringas, C.; Estrada, C.; Antuña, M.A.; Quevedo, R. Labeling dating abuse: Undetected abuse among Spanish adolescents and young adults. Int. J. Clin. Health Psychol. 2012, 12, 55–67. [Google Scholar]
  10. López, J.; Lana, A.; Rodríguez, L.; Paíno, G.; Rodríguez, F.J. Perception and labeling of the violent experience in youth dating relationships. Gac. Sanit. 2015, 29, 21–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bringas, C.; Estrada, C.; Suárez, J.; Torres, A.; Rodríguez, F.J.; García, E. Sexist and transcendent attitude during dating among Latin American university students. Rev. Iberoam. Psicol. Salud 2016, 8, 44–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Butchar, A.; García, C.; Mikton, C. Preventing Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Against Women: Taking Action and Generating Evidence; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  13. Fernández, N.; Moral, M.V. Psychological abuse in dating relationships and perception of severity in Spanish female university students. Rev. Argent. Clin. Psicol. 2019, 38, 554–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Badenes-Sastre, M.; Expósito, F. Perception and detection of gender violence and identification as victims: A bibliometric study. An. Psicol. 2021, 37, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ramiro-Sánchez, T.; Ramiro, M.T.; Bermúdez, M.P.; Buela-Casal, G. Sexism in adolescent relationships: A systematic review. Psychol. Interv. 2018, 27, 123–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Flores, N.; Barreto, M. Dating violence among students of the National Autonomous University of Mexico. A mixed analysis. Rev. Iberom. Educ. Sup. 2018, 9, 42–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Oseguera, A.G.; Peña, J.R.V.; Recéndiz, M.D.J.R.; Morelos, J.G.S. Level of Dating Violence in Adolescents from three locations in Michoacán, Mexico. Cienc. Lat. Rev. Mult. 2023, 7, 21. [Google Scholar]
  18. Rubio-Garay, F.; López-González, M.Á.; Carrasco, M.Á.; Amor, P.J. Prevalence of dating violence: A systematic review. Pap.Psicol. 2017, 38, 135–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mexican Youth Institute (IMJ)/National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI). National Survey on Dating Violence (ENVIN). 2008. Available online: https://en.www.inegi.org.mx/programas/envin/2007/ (accessed on 1 October 2024).
  20. Rodríguez-Hernández, R.; Castillo, N.; Esquivel-Santoveña, E.E. Prevalence and correlates of dating violence in Mexican adolescents and young women. Psychol. Soc. Edu. 2023, 15, 68–75. [Google Scholar]
  21. Heise, L.L. Violence Against Women: An Integrated, Ecological Framework. Violence Against Wom 1998, 4, 262–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Méndez, J. A systematic review of perpetrators of gender violence. Int. E.-J. Crim. Sci. 2022, 7, 1988–7949. [Google Scholar]
  23. Guerra, C.; Fernández, E.; González, M.; García, M.; Del Río, F.J.; Fernández, E. Factors Related to Gender Violence and Sex Education in Adolescents: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rodríguez, L.; López, J.; Rodríguez, F.J.; Bringas, C.; Antuña, M.A.; Estrada, C. Validation of the Dating Violence Questionnaire, DVQ (Cuestionario de Violencia entre Novios, CUVINO) among Spanish-speaking youth: Analysis of results in Spain, Mexico and Argentina. An. Psicol. Clín.Sal./Ann. Clin. Health Psychol. 2010, 6, 43–50. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11441/132791 (accessed on 19 March 2022).
  25. Fernández, I.; Cuadrado, I.; Martín, G. Synergy between Acceptance of Violence and Sexist Attitudes as a Dating Violence Risk Factor. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Arbach, K.; Vaiman, M.; Bobbio, A.; Bruera, J. Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Factorial invariance between genders and relationship with intimate partner violence. Interdisciplinaria 2019, 36, 59–76. [Google Scholar]
  27. León, C.M.; Aizpurúa, E. Do sexist attitudes persist among university students? An analysis of its prevalence, predictors and gender differences. Educ. XX1 2020, 23, 275–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Vázquez, N.; Pastor, Y. Use of social networks and instant messaging in couple relationships in youth: A preliminary study. Health Addic. 2019, 19, 87–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Esteban, B.; Fernández, P. Sexist attitudes in young people?: Exploration of ambivalent sexism and neosexism in the university population. Femeris 2017, 2, 137–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rodríguez, Y.; Lameiras, M. Evaluation of modern sexism in adolescents. Rev. Psicol. Soc 2002, 17, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Madolell, R.; Gallardo, M.A.; Alemany, I. Gender stereotypes and sexist attitudes in university students in a multicultural context. Rev. Curr. Form. Prof. 2020, 24, 285–303. Available online: https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/profesorado/article/view/78346 (accessed on 19 March 2022).
  32. Zamudio, F.J.; Andrade, M.A.; Arana, R.I.; Alvarado, A.A. Gender violence against university students. Converg. Rev. Cienc. Soc. 2017, 24, 133–157. [Google Scholar]
  33. Yanes, J.M.; González, R. Cognitive correlates associated with the experience of interparental violence. Psicothema 2000, 12, 41–48. [Google Scholar]
  34. Merma, G.; Gavilán, D.; Molina, D.; Urrea, M. The impact of gender roles on the sexist attitudes of adolescents in the school environment. Bordón Rev. Pedag. 2021, 73, 113–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Sánchez, A.; Delgado, C.; Bosch, E.; Ferreiro, V.; Ferrer, 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. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Giraldo, D.P.; Herrera, L.D.; Velázquez, N.S. Factors that Contribute to Gender-Based Violence in Latin American Countries: Patriarchal Upbringing as a Cultural Factor; CES University: Bogota, Colombia, 2023; Available online: https://repository.ces.edu.co/handle/10946/7359 (accessed on 17 April 2022).
  37. Orozco, A.E.; Venebra, A.; Aguilera, U.; García, G.I. Trajectory analysis of patriarchal and sexist beliefs, attitudes favorable to violence and dating violence. Psicol. Cond. 2022, 30, 309–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Rodríguez, R.; Riosvelasco, L.; Castillo, N. Dating violence, gender and social support in young university students. Escr. Psicol./Psychol. Writ. 2018, 11, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Saldívar, G.J.; Rivera, B.E.; Moreno, A.; Trejo, J.G. Evaluation of a prevention and intervention program for dating violence in adolescents. Psicol. Iberoam. 2022, 30, e301428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Reyes-Colorado, J.D.; Rivera-Fong, L.; Tellez-Rojas, M.A.; González-Rodríguez, E.; Galindo-Vázquez, O.; Mancilla, A.S. Construction and validation of an instrument of dating violence in heterosexual and homosexual couples. Rev. Electr. Psic. Izt. 2017, 20, 581–605. [Google Scholar]
  41. Rodríguez- Franco, L.; Antuña, A.; Rodríguez-Díaz, F.J.; Herrero, F.J.; Nieves, V.E. Gender violence in dating relationships during adolescence. Differential analysis of the dating violence questionnaire (CUVINO). In Legal Psychology. Violence and Victims; Arce, R., Fariña, F., Alfaro, E., Civera, C., Eds.; Valencia Provincial Council: Valencia, Spain, 2007; pp. 137–146. [Google Scholar]
  42. Rodríguez-Franco, L.; Juarros, J.; Paíno, S.; Herrero, J.; Rodríguez-Díaz, F.J. Dating Violence Questionnaire for Victimization and Perpetration (DVQ-VP): An interdependence analysis of self-reports. Int. J. Clin. Health Psychol. 2022, 22, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Rodríguez-Franco, L.; López-Cepero, J.; López-Núñez, M.I.; Paíno-Quesada, S.G.; Antuña-Bellerín, M.Á.; Bringas-Molleda, C.; Rodríguez-Díaz, F.J. Evolution of victimization, tolerance and detection of intimate partner violence among young Spanish women. Intern. J. Soc. Psychol. 2016, 31, 137–156. [Google Scholar]
  44. García, E.; Rodríguez, F.J.; Bringas, C.; López, J.; Paíno, S.; Rodríguez, L. Development of the Gender Role Attitudes Scale (GRAS) amongst young Spanish people. Inte J. Clin. Health Psychol. 2015, 15, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Pérez, B.; Concha, A.; Fernández, A.; Juarros, J.; Rodríguez, F.J. The Gender Role Attitude Scale (GRAS) as an alternative for the crisis in measurement of attitudes towards gender roles in Latin America: A study in Chilean university students. An. Psicol. 2021, 37, 567–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. American Psychological Association. 2010 amendments to the 2002 “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct”. Am. Psychol. 2010, 65, 493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Ruiz, R.; Ayala, M.R. Gender violence in educational institutions. Rev. Ra Ximhai 2016, 12, 21–32. Available online: https://www.redalyc.org/comocitar.oa?id=46146696002 (accessed on 20 March 2023). [CrossRef]
  48. García, M.J.; Matud, M.P. Mental health in women abused by their partners. A study with samples from Mexico and Spain. Salud Ment. 2015, 38, 321–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sánchez-Jiménez, V.; Muñoz-Fernández, N.; Lucio-López, L.A.; Ortega-Ruiz, R. Cyberaggression in adolescent couples: A cross-cultural study Spain-Mexico. Rev. Mex. Psicol. 2017, 34, 46–54. [Google Scholar]
  50. Velázquez, Y.; Díaz, M.D. Violence and workplace inequality in Mexico: Theoretical review from a gender perspective. Andamios 2020, 17, 423–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Saldívar, G.J.; Moreno, A.; Trejo, J.G. Exposure to family violence and dating violence in adolescents from Mexico City: Protective factors and risk. Psicol. Iberoam. 2022, 30, e302475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Illescas, D.I.Á. Violence practices in dating relationships in students of the American College Institute during the period 2021-2022. Rev. Científ. Tec. VICTEC 2023, 4, 60–85. [Google Scholar]
  53. Orozco-Vargas, A.E.; Mercado-Monjardín, M.D.R.; García-López, G.I.; Venebra-Muñoz, A.; Aguilera-Reyes, U. Beliefs about violence and their effects on the prevalence of dating violence. Acta Col. Psicol. 2021, 24, 154–166. [Google Scholar]
  54. Ullrich, R.; Becher, M.; Scharf, J. The Development of Gender Role Attitudes During Adolescence: Effects of Sex, Socioeconomic Background, an Cognitive Abilities. J. Youth Adolesc. 2022, 51, 2114–2129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Martínez-Gómez, J.A.; Bolívar-Suárez, Y.; Rey-Anacona, C.A.; Ramírez-Ortiz, L.C.; Lizarazo-Ojeda, A.M.; Yanez-Perúñuñi, L.Y. Traditional Schemes of Sexual Gender Roles, Power in Relationships and Violence in Dating. Rev. Iberoam. Psicol. Sal. 2021, 12, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Rivas-Rivero, E.; Bonilla-Algovia, E. Cyber violence against the couple in university students in Spain and Latin America. Psicol. Conduct 2024, 32, 145–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Moral, M.V.; Prieto, P. Emotional Dependence and Partner Cyber Abuse through Social Networks in Spanish University Students. Rev. Iberoam. Psicol. Sal. 2022, 13, 15–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Terrazas-Carrillo, E.; Sabina, C.; Vásquez, D.A.; Garcia, E. Cultural correlates of dating violence in a combined gender group of Latino college students. J. Interpers. Violence 2024, 39, 785–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Sociodemographic data of participants according to their country of origin.
Table 1. Sociodemographic data of participants according to their country of origin.
Spain
(N = 6401)		Mexico
(N = 3113)
Female
(N = 5628)		38721756
Male
(N = 3886)		25291357
Average age18.1 (DT = 2.12)17.9 (DT = 2.69)
Students
(N = 9491)		6370Secondary studies: 35443121Secondary studies: 1584
Professional formation: 1472Professional formation: 0
Universities: 1354Universities: 1537
Work
(N = 1279)		498Social security: 242
No social security: 256		781Social security: 393
No social security: 388
Table 2. Incidence of gender violence according to the cultural context.
Table 2. Incidence of gender violence according to the cultural context.
Cultural Context% x ¯ MdRangeU Mann–WhitneypCohen’s d
Spain65.6616.118248 × 103 + 6<0.0010.203
Mexico34.3414.51724
Note. Md = Median.
Table 3. Reiteration of violent behavior according to the sex of the participants.
Table 3. Reiteration of violent behavior according to the sex of the participants.
Sex% x ¯ MdRangeU Mann–WhitneypCohen’s d
Women60.0618.820244.5 × 103 + 6<0.0011.068
Men39.9413.11224
Note. Md = Median.
Table 4. Gender role attitudes by cultural context.
Table 4. Gender role attitudes by cultural context.
Cultural Context% x ¯ MdRangeU Mann–WhitneypCohen’s d
Spain65.6661.161754.7 × 103 + 6<0.0010.623
Mexico34.3455.35567
Note. Md = Median.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Moral-Jiménez, M.d.l.V.; Alvarez-Menéndez, A.; Rodríguez-Díaz, F.J. Attitudes Regarding Gender Roles and Recurrence of Dating Violence in Spanish and Mexican Adolescents. Societies 2025, 15, 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15030070

AMA Style

Moral-Jiménez MdlV, Alvarez-Menéndez A, Rodríguez-Díaz FJ. Attitudes Regarding Gender Roles and Recurrence of Dating Violence in Spanish and Mexican Adolescents. Societies. 2025; 15(3):70. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15030070

Chicago/Turabian Style

Moral-Jiménez, María de la Villa, Aitana Alvarez-Menéndez, and Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Díaz. 2025. "Attitudes Regarding Gender Roles and Recurrence of Dating Violence in Spanish and Mexican Adolescents" Societies 15, no. 3: 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15030070

APA Style

Moral-Jiménez, M. d. l. V., Alvarez-Menéndez, A., & Rodríguez-Díaz, F. J. (2025). Attitudes Regarding Gender Roles and Recurrence of Dating Violence in Spanish and Mexican Adolescents. Societies, 15(3), 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15030070

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop