Men’s and women’s exposure and perpetration of partner violence: an epidemiological study from Sweden

BMC Public Health

Gunilla Krantz¹  Solveig Lövestad¹ 

[1]Department of Community Medicine and Public Health/Social Medicine, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Göteborg, Box 453, 40530, Sweden

关键词: Sweden;    Women;    Men;    Risk factors;    Controlling behaviour;    Intimate partner violence;   

Others  :  1162884
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-12-945

 received in 2012-04-23, accepted in 2012-10-24,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Over the past 30 years, intimate partner violence (IPV) against women and its health consequences has become a well established research area and is recognized worldwide as a significant public health issue. Studies on IPV directed at men are less explored, however recently women’s use of IPV and men’s victimization is gaining growing attention. Earlier population-based studies performed in Sweden have primarily investigated men’s violence against women, while women’s use of violence and men’s exposure as well as the existence of controlling behaviours have been neglected research areas This explorative study investigated the exposure to and perpetration of intimate partner violence, the use of control behaviours and the associated risk factors among a sample of Swedish men and women.

Methods

This cross-sectional population-based study included 173 men and 251 women of age 18–65 randomly selected among the Swedish population. A questionnaire based on the revised Conflicts Tactics Scale (CTS2) and the subscale ‘isolating control’ from the Controlling Behaviour Scale (CBS) was used to collect data on violence exposure and perpetration. Regression analyses were used for risk factor assessment.

Results

More men (11%) than women (8%) reported exposure to physical assault in the past year, while more women reported exposure to sexual coercion. Duration of present relationship ≤ 3 years was identified as a significant risk factor for men’s exposure. Young age, lack of social support and being single, constituted risk factors for women’s exposure. Surprisingly many men (37%) and women (41%) also reported exposure to controlling behaviours.

Conclusions

In partner violence research, both men’s and women’s exposure should be explored however findings need to be interpreted with caution. This first study in a Swedish sample establishes the basis for future investigations on partner violence and coercive control tactics.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Loevestad and Krantz; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Watts C, Zimmerman C: Violence against women: global scope and magnitude. Lancet 2002, 359(9313):1232-1237.
• [2]Krug EG, Mercy JA, Dahlberg LL, Zwi AB: The world report on violence and health. Lancet 2002, 360(9339):1083-1088.
• [3]Bair-Merritt MH, Crowne SS, Thompson DA, Sibinga E, Trent M, Campbell J: Why Do Women Use Intimate Partner Violence? A Systematic Review of Women's Motivations. Trauma Violence Abuse 2010, 11(4):178-189.
• [4]Romans S, Forte T, Cohen MM, Du Mont J, Hyman I: Who is most at risk for intimate partner violence?: A Canadian population-based study. J Interpers Violence 2007, 22(12):1495-1514.
• [5]Johnson MP: Conflict and control: gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women 2006, 12(11):1003-1018.
• [6]Archer J: Sex differences in physically aggressive acts between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Aggression Violent Behav 2002, 7(4):313-351.
• [7]Straus MA: Processes explaining the concealment and distortion of evidence on gender symmetry in partner violence. Eur J Crim Policy Res 2007, 13(3–4):227-232.
• [8]Swan SC, Gambone LJ, Caldwell JE, Sullivan TP, Snow DL: A review of research on women's use of violence with male intimate partners. Violence Vict 2008, 23(3):301-314.
• [9]Dobash RP, Dobash RE: Women's violence to men in intimate relationships: Working on a puzzle. Br J Crim 2004, 44(3):324-349.
• [10]Breiding MJ, Black MC, Ryan GW: Prevalence and risk factors of intimate partner violence in eighteen U.S. states/territories, 2005. Am J Prev Med 2008, 34(2):112-118.
• [11]Ansara DL, Hindin MJ: Exploring gender differences in the patterns of intimate partner violence in Canada: a latent class approach. J Epidemiol Community Health 2010, 64(10):849-854.
• [12]Whitaker DJ, Haileyesus T, Swahn M, Saltzman LS: Differences in frequency of violence and reported injury between relationships with reciprocal and nonreciprocal intimate partner violence. Am J Public Health 2007, 97(5):941-947.
• [13]Coker AL, Davis KE, Arias I, Desai S, Sanderson M, Brandt HM, Smith PH: Physical and mental health effects of intimate partner violence for men and women. Am J Prev Med 2002, 23(4):260-268.
• [14]Stark E: Do violent acts equal abuse? Resolving the gender parity/asymmetry dilemma. Sex Roles 2010, 62(3–4):201-211.
• [15]Graham-Kevan N, Archer J: Intimate terrorism and common couple violence. a test of Johnson's predictions in four British samples. J Interpers Violence 2003, 18(11):1247-1270.
• [16]Risberg G, Lundgren E, Westman G: Prevalence of sexualized violence among women. a population-based study in a primary healthcare district. Scand J Public Health 1999, 27(4):247-253.
• [17]Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB: The revised conflict tactics scales (CTS2) development and preliminary psychometric data. J Fam Issues 1996, 17(3):283-316.
• [18]Straus MA: Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the revised Conflict Tactics Scales: a study of university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross Cult Res 2004, 38(4):407-432.
• [19]Allen CT, Swan SC, Raghavan C: Gender symmetry, sexism, and intimate partner violence. J Interpers Violence 2009, 24(11):1816-1834.
• [20]Östberg V, Lennartsson C: Getting by with a little help: The importance of various types of social support for health problems. Scand J Public Health 2007, 35(2):197-204.
• [21]Lundgren E: Slagen Dam: Mäns Våldmot kvinnor i jämställda Sverige-enomfångs undersökning (Captured queen - men′s violence against women in "equal" Sweden - a prevalence study). Brottsoffermyndigheten 2001.
• [22]Caldwell JE, Swan SC, Allen CT, Sullivan TP, Snow DL: Why I Hit Him: Women's Reasons for Intimate Partner Violence. J Aggress Maltreat Trauma 2009, 18(7):672-697.
• [23]Kimmel MS: "Gender symmetry" in domestic violence: A substantive and methodological research review. Violence Against Women 2002, 8(11):1332-1363.
• [24]Campbell JC: Health consequences of intimate partner violence. Lancet 2002, 359(9314):1331-1336.
• [25]Campbell J, Jones AS, Dienemann J, Kub J, Schollenberger J, O'Campo P, Gielen AC, Wynne C: Intimate partner violence and physical health consequences. Arch Intern Med 2002, 162(10):1157-1163.
• [26]Johnson MP: Gender and types of intimate partner violence: A response to an anti-feminist literature review. Aggression Violent Behav 2011, 16(4):289-296.
• [27]Escriba-Aguir V, Ruiz-Perez I, Montero-Pinar MI, Vives-Cases C, Plazaola-Castano J, Martin-Baena D: Partner violence and psychological well-being: buffer or indirect effect of social support. Psychosom Med 2010, 72(4):383-389.
• [28]Straus MA: Prevalence of violence against dating partners by male and female university students worldwide. Violence Against Women 2004, 10(7):790-811.
• [29]Caetano R, Vaeth PAC, Ramisetty-Mikler S: Intimate partner violence victim and perpetrator characteristics among couples in the United States. J Fam Violence 2008, 23(6):507-518.
• [30]Jewkes R: Violence against women III: intimate partner violence: causes and prevention. Lancet 2002, 359(9315):1423-1429.
• [31]Sabina C, Tindale RS: Abuse characteristics and coping resources as predictors of problem-focused coping strategies among battered women. Violence Against Women 2008, 14(4):437-456.