Predictors of Cognitive Distortions in Intimate Partner Violence: An Analysis of Ideological, Relational and Sociodemographic Factors
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Perceived Severity of and Attributed Self-Responsibility in IPV
3. Predictors of Perceived Severity and Attributed Self-Responsibility
3.1. Ideological Variables
3.2. Relational Variables
3.3. Sociodemographic Variables
3.4. Role of Cognitive Distortions Based on Type of IPV
4. The Present Study
5. Method
5.1. Design and Procedure
5.2. Participants
5.3. Instruments
- Perceived Severity. Based on the previous literature (Badenes-Sastre et al., 2023a, 2023b; Garrido-Macías et al., 2017; Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2020), perceived severity was measured by asking, “To what extent do you perceive the behavior as serious?” Participants responded on a 7-point response scale (1 = nothing severe, 7 = very severe). This question was posed four times, corresponding to each type of violence evaluated (physical, sexual, psychological violence, and controlling behaviors).
- Attributed Self-responsibility. Drawing on the previous literature (Badenes-Sastre et al., 2024b; McCullough et al., 2003) that assessed responsibility attributed to the aggressor, the measurement approach was adapted to align with the objectives of the present study, focusing on the assessment of attributed self-responsibility. Participants were asked, “To what extent do you consider yourself responsible for these behaviors?” They responded on a scale from 1 (not at all responsible) to 7 (very responsible), applying this evaluation individually for each violence type: physical, sexual, psychological, and controlling behaviors.
5.4. Analysis Strategy and Data Extraction
6. Results
6.1. Prevalence of IPV
6.2. Predictors of Perceived Severity of IPV and Attributed Self-Responsibility
6.3. Differences in Perceived Severity and Attributed Self-Responsibility According to Type of IPV
6.4. Auxiliary Analyses: Differences in Perceived Severity and Attributed Self-Responsibility According to Recent vs. Lifetime IPV Experiences
7. Discussion
Limitations and Future Directions
8. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Aiquipa, J. J. (2015). Dependencia emocional en mujeres víctimas de violencia de pareja [Emotional dependency in women victims of intimate partner violence]. Revista de Psicología, 33(2), 411–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aiquipa Tello, J. J., & Canción Suárez, N. M. (2020). Mujeres supervivientes de violencia de pareja: Factores y procesos psicológicos implicados en la decisión de permanecer o abandonar la relación [Women survivors of intimate partner violence: Factors and psychological processes involved in the decision to stay or leave the relationship]. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 38(1), 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnoso, A., Arnoso, M., & Elgorriaga, E. (2022). The intercultural role of attitudes towards violence against women among moroccan immigrants. Violence Against Women, 28(12–13), 3073–3095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badenes-Sastre, M., Beltrán-Morillas, A. M., & Expósito, F. (2023a). Absence versus presence of intimate partner violence in a sample of Spanish women: Conflict resolution strategies and associated variables. Violence Against Women, 30(3–4), 3–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Badenes-Sastre, M., Beltrán-Morillas, A. M., Lorente, M., & Expósito, F. (2024a). Barriers to Help-Seeking in a Spanish Sample of Women Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence. The Journal of Psychology, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badenes-Sastre, M., & Expósito, F. (2021). Perception and detection of gender violence, and identification as victims: A bibliometric study. Annals of Psychology, 37(2), 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badenes-Sastre, M., Lorente, M., Beltrán-Morillas, A. M., & Expósito, F. (2024b). Transformative effect of intimate partner violence against women based on sociocultural factors trapping women in a violent relationship. Current Psychology, 43(12), 10786–10800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badenes-Sastre, M., Lorente Acosta, M., Herrero Machancoses, F., & Expósito Jiménez, F. (2023b). Spanish adaptation and validation of the World Health Organization’s violence against women instrument. Psicothema, 35(2), 202–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badenes-Sastre, M., Medinilla-Tena, P., Spencer, C. M., & Expósito, F. (2025). Cognitive distortions and decision-making in women victims of intimate partner violence: A scoping review. Psychosocial Intervention, 34(1), 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badenes-Sastre, M., Spencer, C. M., Alonso-Ferres, M., Lorente, M., & Expósito, F. (2024c). How severity of intimate partner violence is perceived and related to attitudinal variables? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 76, 101925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beltrán-Morillas, A. M., Valor-Segura, I., & Expósito, F. (2019). Dependencia específica de pareja y sentimiento de culpa como predictores del perdón en mujeres universitarias españolas. Revista Española de Psicología, 22, E19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bologna, E. (2022). “Tamaño del Efecto” [Effect Size]. In P. Caro, M. Cupani, A. D’Amelio, M. S. Galibert, J. Lorenzo, M. M. Santillán, & J. C. Rodríguez (Eds.), Un Recorrido por los Métodos Cuantitativos en Ciencias Sociales a Bordo de R [A Tour of Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences Aboard R] (Cap. 14). Available online: https://estadisticacienciassocialesr.rbind.io/tama%C3%B1o-del-efecto.html (accessed on 3 July 2024).
- Bonilla-Algovia, E., & Rivas-Rivero, E. (2021). Violencia íntima de pareja contra las mujeres: Un estudio de las creencias en docentes en formación de España y América Latina. International Journal of Psychological Research, 14(2), 18–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bucheli, M., & Rossi, M. (2017). Attitudes toward partner violence and gender roles in uruguayan women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(23), 3693–3705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buesa, S., & Calvete, E. (2011). Adaptación de la escala de abuso psicológico sutil y manifiesto a las mujeres en muestra clínica y de la comunidad [Adaptation of the scale of subtle and overt psychological abuse in clinical and community women samples]. Anales de Psicología, 27, 774–782. [Google Scholar]
- Carbonell Marqués, Á., & Mestre, M. V. (2019). Sexismo, amor romántico y desigualdad de género. Un estudio en adolescentes latinoamericanos residentes en España. América Latina Hoy, 83, 59–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cárdenas, M., & Arancibia, H. (2014). Statistical power and effect size calculating in G*Power: Complementary analysis of statistical significance testing and its application in Psychology. Salud & Sociedad, 5(2), 210–224. [Google Scholar]
- Cinquegrana, V., Marini, M., & Galdi, S. (2022). From endorsement of ambivalent sexism to psychological IPV victimization: The role of attitudes supportive of IPV, legitimating myths of IPV, and acceptance of psychological aggression. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 922814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Lemus, S., Bukowski, M., Spears, R., & Telga, M. (2015). Reactance to (or acceptance of) stereotypes: Implicit and explicit responses to group identity threat. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie, 223(4), 236–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delker, B. C., Michel, P. K., Turner, K., & McLean, K. C. (2022). Perceptions of Physical, Sexual, and Psychological Violence Stories: A Registered Report. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), 36330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diakonova-Curtis, D. (2013). Factors affecting the perceptions of sexual assault of women in Russia [Doctoral dissertation, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing]. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/docview/304566221?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true (accessed on 13 January 2025).
- Dim, E. E., & Elabor-Idemudia, P. (2021). Social Structure, Social Learning, and the Severity of Physical Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in Nigeria. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(5–6), 2862–2886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Expósito, F., Moya, M., & Glick, P. (1998). Sexismo ambivalente: Medición y correlatos [Ambivalent sexism: Measurement and correlates]. Revista de Psicología Social, 13(2), 159–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fanslow, J. L., & Robinson, E. M. (2010). Help-seeking behaviors and reasons for help seeking reported by a representative sample of women victims of intimate partner violence in New Zealand. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(5), 929–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical Power Analyses Using G*Power 3.1: Tests for Correlation and Regression Analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández Ramos, S. (2020). Violencia psicológica en el noviazgo en población adolescente: Factores de riesgo asociados [Psychological violence in adolescent dating relationships: Associated risk factors] [Tesis doctoral inédita, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Facultad de Psicología, Departamento de Psicología Biológica y de la Salud]. Repositorio Académico UAM. Available online: https://repositorio.uam.es/handle/10486/694095 (accessed on 19 February 2025).
- Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Fiorillo-Ponte, J. (1999). An investigation of the severity, frequency, and perceived severity of physical abuse according to the amount of time spent in an abusive relationship [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/openview/188b9097cb41f3a7753799c920a2ede2/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y (accessed on 18 November 2024).
- Fletcher, G. J. O., Simpson, J. A., & Thomas, G. (2000). The measurement of perceived relationship quality components: A confirmatory factor analytic approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(3), 340–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gallego Rodríguez, C., & Fernández-González, L. (2019). ¿Se relaciona el consumo de pornografía con la violencia hacia la pareja? El papel moderador de las actitudes hacia la mujer y la violencia. Behavioral Psychology/Psicología Conductual, 27(3), 431–454. [Google Scholar]
- Garrido-Macías, M., Valor-Segura, I., & Expósito, F. (2017). ¿Dejaría a mi pareja? Influencia de la gravedad de la transgresión, la satisfacción y el compromiso en la toma de decisión [Would I leave my partner? Influence of transgression severity, satisfaction, and commitment on decision-making]. Psychosocial Intervention, 26(2), 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garrido-Macías, M., Valor-Segura, I., & Expósito, F. (2020). Sexual transgressions in couples: The influence of dependence and commitment on their perception and handling. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 23, e20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garrido-Macías, M., Valor-Segura, I., & Expósito, F. (2022). Experiencia de coerción sexual y reacciones de las mujeres ante la violencia sexual de pareja. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(11–12), NP8965–NP8988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gilbert, S., & Gordon, K. (2017). Predicting forgiveness in women experiencing intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 23(4), 452–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. In J. Dixon, & M. Levine (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of conflict, inequality and social change (pp. 70–88). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gomez-Pulido, E., Garrido-Macías, M., Miss-Ascencio, C., & Expósito, F. (2024). Under the Shadows of Gender Violence: An exploration of sexual consent through Spanish university women’s experiences. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 16(2), 111–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodfriend, W., & Arriaga, X. (2018). Cognitive reframing of intimate partner aggression: Social and contextual influences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(11), 2464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gracia, E., García, F., & Lila, M. (2009a). Public responses to intimate partner violence against women: The influence of perceived severity and personal responsibility. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 648–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gracia, E., Herrero, J., Lila, M., & Fuente, A. (2009b). Perceived neighborhood social disorder and attitudes toward domestic violence against women among Latin-American immigrants. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 1(1), 25–43. Available online: https://digibuo.uniovi.es/dspace/bitstream/handle/10651/35541/Vol1gracia.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2025).
- Guerrero-Molina, M., Moreno-Manso, J. M., Guerrero-Barona, E., García-Baamonde, M. E., Cruz-Márquez, B., & Bueso-Izquierdo, N. (2023). Aggressors condemned for intimate partner violence: Sexist attitudes and distorted thoughts about women and the use of violence. Current Psychology, 42(1), 560–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hegarty, K., & Tarzia, L. (2019). Identification and Management of Domestic and Sexual Violence in Primary Care in the #MeToo Era: An Update. Current Psychiatry Reports, 21(2), 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ibabe, I., Arnoso, A., & Elgorriaga, E. (2016). Ambivalent sexism inventory: Adaptation to basque population and sexism as a risk factor of dating violence. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 19, E78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). (2024, May 17). Estadística de Violencia Doméstica y Violencia de Género (EVDVG). Año 2023. Available online: https://www.ine.es/dyngs/INEbase/es/operacion.htm?c=Estadistica_C&cid=1254736176866&idp=1254735573206&menu=ultiDatos (accessed on 6 November 2024).
- Lelaurain, S., Fonte, D., Aim, M.-A., Khatmi, N., Decarsin, T., Lo Monaco, G., & Apostolidis, T. (2018). “One doesn’t slap a girl but…” Social representations and conditional logics in legitimization of intimate partner violence. Sex Roles, 78(9–10), 637–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lelaurain, S., Fonte, D., Giger, J.-C., Guignard, S., & Lo Monaco, G. (2021). Legitimizing intimate partner violence: The role of romantic love and the mediating effect of patriarchal ideologies. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(13–14), 6351–6368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lelaurain, S., Graziani, P., & Lo Monaco, G. (2017). Intimate partner violence and help-seeking: A systematic review and social psychological tracks for future research. European Psychologist, 22(4), 263–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- León, C. M., & Aizpurua, E. (2023). Do Youth Dream of Gender Stereotypes? The Relationship among Gender Stereotyping, Support for Feminism, and Acceptance of Gender-Based Violence. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(3), 2439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ludermir, A. B., Araújo, T. V. B. D., Valongueiro, S. A., Muniz, M. L. C., & Silva, E. P. (2017). Previous experience of family violence and intimate partner violence in pregnancy. Revista de Saúde Pública, 51, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maß, R. (2022). Selbstverantwortung in Partnerschaft und Sexualität. Eine empirische Studie [Self-responsibility in partnership and sexuality: An empirical study]. Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung, 35(1), 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martín-Fernández, M., Gracia, E., & Lila, M. (2022). Measuring perceived severity of intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) among the general population and IPVAW offenders. Psychosocial Intervention, 31(2), 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McCullough, M. E., Fincham, F. D., & Tsang, J. A. (2003). Forgiveness, forbearance, and time: The temporal unfolding of transgression-related interpersonal motivations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 540–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Medinilla-Tena, P., Aguilera-Cortell, A., Badenes-Sastre, M., Apiazu-Calcedo, O., & Expósito, F. (2024). ¿Qué necesitan las víctimas de violencia de género para sentir que se hace justicia? Motivos y variables relacionadas [What do victims of gender-based violence need to feel that justice is served? Motives and related variables]. Revista Iberoamericana de Justicia Terapéutica, (8). Available online: https://ar.ijeditores.com/pop.php?option=articulo&Hash=498d76d7d5a7b8a2fde7685c75d57b98 (accessed on 16 December 2024).
- Muñoz-Rivas, M. J., Ronzón-Tirado, R., López-Ossorio, J. J., & Redondo, N. (2024). Beyond the Initial Assault: Characterizing Revictimization in Intimate Partner Violence and Its Implications for Women’s Health. Psychosocial Intervention, 33(2), 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikupeteri, A., Skaffari, P., & Laitinen, M. (2022). Feminist community work in preventing violence against women: A case study of addressing intimate partner violence in Finland. Nordic Social Work Research, 12(2), 256–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Novo, M., Herbón, J., & Amado, B. (2016). Género y victimización: Efectos en la evaluación de la violencia psicológica sutil y manifiesta, apego adulto y tácticas de resolución de conflictos [Gender and victimization: Effects on the evaluation of subtle and overt psychological violence, adult attachment, and conflict resolution tactics]. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 7, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pastor, Y., Pascual, E., Muñoz, J. J., & Bravo, S. M. (2020). Wording effect in the measurement of attitudes towards dating violence. Psychosocial Intervention, 29(1), 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reich, C. M., Jones, J. M., Woodward, M. J., Blackwell, N., Lindsey, L. D., & Beck, J. G. (2015). Does self-blame moderate psychological adjustment following intimate partner violence? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30(9), 1493–1510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riddle, K., & Di, Z. (2020). Are caregivers concerned about media violence? A survey of U.S. parents’ beliefs about specific media violence effects. Journal of Children and Media, 14(4), 438–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rusbult, C. E., & Arriaga, X. B. (1997). Interdependence theory. In S. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research, and interventions (2nd ed., pp. 221–250). John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar]
- Rusbult, C. E., & Martz, J. M. (1995). Remaining in an abusive relationship: An investment model analysis of nonvoluntary dependence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(6), 558–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarmiento, K. (2023). Pantallazo a la violencia de género: Redes sociales y ciber violencia en relaciones sexo-afectivas entre adolescentes [Snapshot of gender-based violence: Social media and cyber violence in sex-affective relationships among adolescents]. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú y Consorcio de Investigación Económica y Social. Available online: https://cies.org.pe/investigacion/pantallazo-a-la-violencia-de-genero-redes-sociales-y-ciberviolencia-en-relaciones-sexo-afectivas-entre-adolescentes/ (accessed on 10 February 2025).
- Sánchez-Hernández, M. D., Herrera, M. C., & Expósito, F. (2024). Is online disinhibition related to cyberdating abuse perpetration through moral disengagement? The moderating role of gender, sexism, and cybervictimization. Sex Roles 90, 938–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Hernández, M. D., Herrera-Enríquez, M. C., & Expósito, F. (2020). Controlling behaviors in couple relationships in the digital age: Acceptability of gender violence, sexism, and myths about romantic love. Psychosocial Intervention, 29(2), 67–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Prada, A., Delgado-Alvarez, C., Bosch-Fiol, E., Ferreiro-Basurto, V., & Ferrer-Perez, V. A. (2020). Measurement of supportive attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women among a Spanish-speaker sample. PLoS ONE, 15(11), e0241392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spanish Ministry of Equality. (2020). Macroencuesta de violencia contra la mujer 2019 [Violence against women macro-survey 2019]; Ministry of Equality. Available online: https://violenciagenero.igualdad.gob.es/violenciaEnCifras/macroencuesta2015/Macroencuesta2019/home.htm (accessed on 21 October 2024).
- Tan, K., Arriaga, X. B., & Agnew, C. R. (2018). Running on empty: Measuring psychological dependence in close relationships lacking satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(7), 977–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, C. S., Pun, S. H., & Cheung, F. M. (2002). Responsibility attribution for violence against women: A study of Chinese public service professionals. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(3), 175–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomkins, J., Jolliffe Simpson, A. D., & Polaschek, D. L. L. (2023). High-risk victims of intimate partner violence: An examination of abuse characteristics, psychosocial vulnerabilities and reported revictimization. Journal of Family Violence. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valor-Segura, I., Expósito, F., & Moya, M. (2009). Desarrollo y validación de la versión española de la Spouse-Specific Dependency Scale (SSDS) [Development and validation of the Spanish version of the Spouse-Specific Dependency Scale (SSDS)]. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 9(3), 479–500. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10481/33037 (accessed on 10 February 2025).
- Valor-Segura, I., Expósito, F., & Moya, M. (2011). Victim blaming and exoneration of the perpetrator in domestic violence: The role of beliefs in a just world and ambivalent sexism. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14(1), 195–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valor-Segura, I., Expósito, F., Moya, M., & Kluwer, E. (2014). Don’t leave me: The effect of dependency and emotions in relationship conflict. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(9), 579–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vass, A., Krane, J., & Buchbinder, E. (2024). “Him, Me, or the Both of Us”: Perceptions of blame among Israeli ultraorthodox women survivors of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vidal-Fernández, A., & Megías, J. L. (2014). Attributions of Blame to Battered Women when they are perceived as Feminists or as “Difficult to Deal with”. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17, E21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Walker, K., Sleath, E., & Tramontano, C. (2021). The prevalence and typologies of controlling behaviors in a general population sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(1–2), NP474–NP503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Waltermaurer, E. (2012). Public Justification of Intimate Partner Violence: A Review of the Literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 13(3), 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L. (2016). Factors influencing attitude toward intimate partner violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 29, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, J., & Smirles, K. (2022). College students’ perceptions of intimate partner violence: The effects of type of abuse and perpetrator gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(1–2), 172–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization. ((2024,, March 25)). Violence against women. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Yamawaki, N., Riley, C., & Gardner, N. (2018). The Effects of Gender-Role Traditionality and Gender of Abuser on Attitudes Toward Intimate Partner Violence and Perceived Body Size of the Victim and Abuser. Partner Abuse, 9(3), 230–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, C., Liu, W., Wang, Y., Xu, S., Xu, Y., Yang, L., Zhou, Q., & Li, J. (2023). Influence of Ambivalent Sexism on Intimate Partner Violence Tolerance and Mental Violence in a Chinese Female Sample: Relationship Causality Orientation as a Moderator. Violence Against Women, 29(9), 1623–1639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Perceived Severity | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Physical violence | ||||
Predictors | R2 | b | t | 95% CI |
Step 1 | 0.02 * | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.33 | −2.38 | [−0.61, −0.05] | |
Step 2 | 0.03 ** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.40 | −2.83 | [−0.68, −0.12] | |
Ambivalent sexism | 0.12 | 2.05 | [0.00, 0.24] | |
Step 3 | 0.06 ** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.37 | −2.66 | [−0.65, −0.09] | |
Ambivalent sexism | 0.07 | 3.12 | [0.08, 0.36] | |
Feminist identification | 0.02 | 2.53 | [0.01, 0.12] | |
Step 4 | 0.10 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.29 | −2.06 | [−0.57, −0.13] | |
Ambivalent sexism | 0.20 | 2.90 | [0.06, 0.34] | |
Feminist identification | 0.07 | 2.71 | [0.01, 0.12] | |
Commitment to the relationship | 0.13 | 3.43 | [0.05, 0.20] | |
Step 5 | 0.12 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.23 | −1.67 | [−0.51, 0.04] | |
Ambivalent sexism | 0.21 | 3.01 | [0.07, 0.35] | |
Feminist identification | 0.06 | 2.62 | [0.01, 0.11] | |
Commitment to the relationship | 0.12 | 3.31 | [0.05, 0.19] | |
Educational level | 0.19 | 2.54 | [0.04, 0.33] | |
Sexual violence | ||||
Predictors | R2 | b | t | 95% CI |
Step 1 | 0.08 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.51 | −4.91 | [−0.72, −0.31] | |
Step 2 | 0.12 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.46 | −4.46 | [−0.67, −0.26] | |
Commitment to the relationship | 0.09 | 3.19 | [0.03, 0.14] | |
Step 3 | 0.14 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.49 | −4.78 | [−0.70, −0.29] | |
Commitment to the relationship | 0.09 | 3.23 | [0.03, 0.14] | |
Age | 0.00 | 2.69 | [0.00, 0.01] | |
Psychological violence | ||||
Predictors | R2 | b | t | 95% CI |
Step 1 | 0.03 ** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.44 | −2.83 | [−0.75, −0.13] | |
Step 2 | 0.06 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.57 | −3.54 | [−0.89, −0.25] | |
Dependency | 0.20 | 2.81 | [0.06, 0.34] | |
Control behaviors | ||||
Predictors | R2 | b | t | 95% CI |
Step 1 | 0.06 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.64 | −4.23 | [−0.94, −0.34] | |
Step 2 | 0.08 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.57 | −3.73 | [−0.87, −0.27] | |
Feminist identification | 0.05 | 2.23 | [0.00, 0.10] | |
Step 3 | 0.10 *** | |||
Attitudes towards IPV | −0.51 | −3.32 | [−0.82, −0.21] | |
Feminist identification | 0.06 | 2.47 | [0.01, 0.10] | |
Commitment to the relationship | 0.09 | 2.33 | [0.01, 0.18] |
Self-Responsibility Attributed | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Sexual violence | ||||
Predictors | R2 | b | t | 95% CI |
Step 1 | 0.02 ** | |||
Being a victim (or not) | 0.58 | 2.68 | [0.15, 1.02] | |
Psychological violence | ||||
Predictors | R2 | b | t | 95% CI |
Step 1 | 0.02 * | |||
Commitment to the relationship | −0.19 | −2.31 | [−0.36, −0.02] | |
Step 2 | 0.03 ** | |||
Commitment to the relationship | −0.23 | −2.74 | [−0.40, −0.06] | |
Dependency | 0.30 | 2.20 | [0.03, 0.58] | |
Step 3 | 0.06 ** | |||
Commitment to the relationship | −0.20 | −2.40 | [−0.37, −0.03] | |
Dependency | 0.27 | 1.98 | [0.00, 0.55] | |
Being a victim (or not) | 0.50 | 2.47 | [0.10, 0.91] | |
Step 4 | 0.08 *** | |||
Commitment to the relationship | −0.20 | −2.43 | [−0.37, −0.03] | |
Dependency | 0.25 | 1.86 | [−0.01, 0.53] | |
Being a victim (or not) | 0.49 | 2.44 | [0.09, 0.90] | |
Age | −0.02 | −2.29 | [−0.03, −0.00] | |
Control Behaviors | ||||
Predictors | R2 | b | t | 95% CI |
Step 1 | 0.02 ** | |||
Ambivalent sexism | 0.40 | 2.77 | [0.11, 0.69] | |
Step 2 | 0.04 ** | |||
Ambivalent sexism | 0.32 | 2.20 | [0.03, 0.62] | |
Attitudes towards IPV | 0.72 | 2.09 | [0.04, 1.41] |
Physical Violence | Sexual Violence | Psychological Violence | Control Behaviors | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | df | F | p | Partial eta Squared | |
Perceived severity | 6.91 | 0.67 | 6.84 | 0.52 | 6.75 | 0.75 | 6.62 | 0.74 | 3.254 | 13.92 | <0.001 | 0.14 |
Attributed self-responsibility | 1.48 | 1.30 | 1.80 | 1.56 | 1.91 | 1.46 | 1.97 | 1.63 | 3.254 | 12.81 | <0.001 | 0.13 |
Perceived Severity | ||||
Comparison | Mean difference | SE | p | 95% CI |
Physical violence vs. Sexual violence | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.53 | [−0.03, 0.17] |
Physical violence vs. Psychological violence | 0.15 * | 0.05 | 0.01 | [0.02, 0.29] |
Physical violence vs. Control behavior | 0.28 * | 0.05 | <0.001 | [0.14, 0.42] |
Sexual violence vs. Psychological violence | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.24 | [−0.02, 0.19] |
Sexual violence vs. Control behavior | 0.21 * | 0.03 | <0.001 | [0.12, 0.31] |
Psychological violence vs. control behavior | 0.13 * | 0.04 | 0.03 | [−0.25, −0.00] |
Attributed Self-Responsibility | ||||
Comparison | Mean difference | SE | p | 95% CI |
Physical violence vs. Sexual violence | −0.31 * | 0.08 | 0.00 | [−0.55, −0.08] |
Physical violence vs. Psychological violence | −0.43 * | 0.08 | <0.001 | [−0.64, −0.22] |
Physical violence vs. Control behavior | −0.48 * | 0.09 | <0.001 | [−0.73, −0.23] |
Sexual violence vs. Psychological violence | −0.11 | 0.09 | 1.00 | [−0.36, −0.13] |
Sexual violence vs. Control behavior | −0.16 | 0.09 | 0.47 | [−0.42, −0.08] |
Psychological violence vs. control behavior | −0.05 | 0.08 | 1.00 | [−0.29, 0.18] |
Lifetime n = 88 | In the Past 12 Months n = 103 | Mean Difference | 95% CI | df | t | p | Partial eta Squared | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Perceived severity | ||||||||||
M | SD | M | SD | |||||||
Physical violence | 6.93 | 0.64 | 6.95 | 0.25 | −0.02 | [−0.15, 0.11] | 189 | −0.28 | 0.77 | 0.47 |
Sexual violence | 6.90 | 0.30 | 6.78 | 0.46 | 0.12 | [0.00, 0.23] | 178.01 | 2.16 | 0.03 | 0.39 |
Psychological violence | 6.74 | 0.70 | 6.76 | 0.53 | −0.01 | [−0.19, 0.15] | 189 | −0.20 | 0.83 | 0.61 |
Control behaviors | 6.61 | 0.74 | 6.58 | 0.65 | 0.03 | [−0.16, 0.23] | 189 | 0.30 | 0.75 | 0.69 |
Self-Responsibility attributed | ||||||||||
M | SD | M | SD | |||||||
Physical violence | 1.40 | 1.00 | 1.64 | 1.50 | −0.24 | [−0.62, 0.13] | 184.62 | −1.25 | 0.20 | 1.33 |
Sexual violence | 1.88 | 1.66 | 2.02 | 1.69 | −0.14 | [−0.62, 0.33] | 189 | −0.59 | 0.55 | 1.68 |
Psychological violence | 1.90 | 1.50 | 2.21 | 1.53 | −0.31 | [−0.75, 0.12] | 189 | −1.43 | 0.15 | 1.52 |
Control behaviors | 1.90 | 1.45 | 2.17 | 1.74 | −0.26 | [−0.73, 0.19] | 189 | −1.13 | 0.25 | 1.61 |
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. |
© 2025 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Medinilla-Tena, P.; Badenes-Sastre, M.; Expósito, F. Predictors of Cognitive Distortions in Intimate Partner Violence: An Analysis of Ideological, Relational and Sociodemographic Factors. Behav. Sci. 2025, 15, 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15050677
Medinilla-Tena P, Badenes-Sastre M, Expósito F. Predictors of Cognitive Distortions in Intimate Partner Violence: An Analysis of Ideological, Relational and Sociodemographic Factors. Behavioral Sciences. 2025; 15(5):677. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15050677
Chicago/Turabian StyleMedinilla-Tena, Patricia, Marta Badenes-Sastre, and Francisca Expósito. 2025. "Predictors of Cognitive Distortions in Intimate Partner Violence: An Analysis of Ideological, Relational and Sociodemographic Factors" Behavioral Sciences 15, no. 5: 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15050677
APA StyleMedinilla-Tena, P., Badenes-Sastre, M., & Expósito, F. (2025). Predictors of Cognitive Distortions in Intimate Partner Violence: An Analysis of Ideological, Relational and Sociodemographic Factors. Behavioral Sciences, 15(5), 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15050677