Gender and cultural effects on perception of psychological violence in the partner

  1. Carmen Delgado Álvarez 1
  2. Benito Estrada Aranda 2
  3. José López Huerto 2
  1. 1 Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca
    info

    Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca

    Salamanca, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02jj93564

  2. 2 Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí (México)
Revue:
Psicothema

ISSN: 0214-9915

Année de publication: 2015

Volumen: 27

Número: 4

Pages: 381-387

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccès ouvert editor

D'autres publications dans: Psicothema

Résumé

Background: Studies reporting similar figures of couple (man-woman) violence and works questioning the validity of the instruments employed have generated controversy about the conceptualization of this construct. One of the critical issues is the different ways of perceiving violence between men and women, as well as its nature in the cultural context. This may affect self-reported answers. Method: A questionnaire evaluating the degree of violence perceived in ten kinds of psychological partner abuse was applied. 1750 students from Spain and Mexico, all of them randomly selected, completed it. Results: Through MANOVA, greater perception of violence in the Spanish sample than in the Mexican one was obtained; in both countries, there was a greater perception in women than in men. Effects of gender-culture interaction were obtained in four dimensions: Isolation, Sexual Pressure, Emotional Manipulation, and Dominance. Multidimensional scaling showed two perceived dimensions: (1) “Proactive-Passive Tactics”, stronger in the Spanish culture and (2) “Punitive-Emotional Tactics”, stronger in the Mexican culture. Conclusions: These results confirm gender-culture effects in perception of psychological violence in the partner.

Références bibliographiques

  • AERA, NCME, & APA(1999). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Archer, J. (2000). Sex Differences in Aggression Between Heterosexual Partners: A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(5), 651-680.
  • Banwell, S. (2010). Gendered Narratives: Women’s Subjective Accounts of Their Use of Violence and Alternative Aggression(s) Within Their Marital Relationships. Feminist Criminology, 5(2), 116-134.
  • Bosch, E., & Ferrer, V. (2012). Nuevo mapa de los mitos sobre la violencia de género en el siglo XXI [New map of the myths about gender violence in XXI century]. Psicothema, 24(4), 548-554.
  • Buss, D. (2000). The dangerous passion. New York: The Free Press.
  • Cantera, I., Estébanez, I., & Vázquez, N. (2009). Violencia contra las mujeres jóvenes, la violencia psicológica en las relaciones de noviazgo [Violence against young women, psychological violence in dating relationships]. Bilbao: EMAKUNDE.
  • DeKeseredy, W. S. (2011). Theoretical and Definitional Issues in Violence Against Women. In M. D. Schwartz, J. Edleson, & R. Bergen, Sourcebook on Violence Against Women (pp. 3-20). California: Sage.
  • DeKeseredy, W. S., & Schwartz, M. D. (1998). Measuring the Extent of Woman Abuse in Intimate Heterosexual Relationships: A Critique of the Conflict Tactics Scales. Applied Research Forum. National Electronic Network on Violence Against Women, 1-6.
  • Delgado, C. (2010). Escala VGP de violencia psicológica de género percibida en la pareja [VGP Scale of perceived gender psychological violence between partners]. Salamanca: Informe de investigación no publicado.
  • Delgado, C. (2014). What Do the Dating Violence Scales Measure? Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 161, 18-23.
  • EUAFR (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights). (2014). Violence against women: an EU-wide survey. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  • Evers, A., Muñiz, J., Hagemeister, C., Høstmælingen, A., Lindley, P., Sjöberg, A., & Bartram, D. (2013). Assessing the quality of tests: revision of the EFPA review model. Psicothema, 25(3), 283-291.
  • Fernández-Fuertes, A., & Fuertes, A. (2010). Physical and psychological aggression in dating relationships of Spanish adolescents: motives and consequences. Child Abuse and Neglect, 34(3), 183-191.
  • Ferrer, V., & Bosch, E. (2014). Gender Violence as a Social Problem in Spain: Attitudes and Acceptability. Sex Roles, 70(11-12), 506-521.
  • Ferrer, V., Bosch, E., & Riera, T. (2006). Las dificultades en la cuantificación de la violencia contra las mujeres en la pareja: análisis psicosocial [The Difficulties in the quantification of the violence against women in the couple: psychosocial analysis]. Intervención Psicosocial [Psychosocial Intervention], 15(2), 181-201.
  • Follingstad, D. R., & Rogers, M. J. (2013). Validity Concerns in the Measurement of Women’s and Men’s Report of Intimate Partner Violence. Sex Roles, 69(3-4), 149-167.
  • Follingstad, D., Rutledge, L., Berg, B., Hause, E., & Polek, D. (1990). The role of emotional. Journal of Family Violence, 5, 107-119.
  • Foshee, V., Bauman, K., Linder, F., Rice, J., & Wilcher, R. (2007). Typologies of adolescent dating violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 498-519.
  • Friend, D. J., Cleary, R. P., Thatcher, R., & Gottman, J. M. (2011). Typologies of Intimate partner Violence: Evaluation of a Screening Instrument for Differentation. Journal of Family Violence, 28(7), 551-563.
  • Frieze, I. H. (2005). Female violence against intimate partners: An Introduction. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29(3), 229-237.
  • Gage, A., & Hutchinson, P. (2006). Power, control and intimate partner sexual violence in Haiti. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 11-24.
  • Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. (2009). Sexual coercion in intimate relationships: A comparative analysis of the effects of women’s infidelity and men’s dominance and control. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 226-234.
  • González, R., & Santana, J. D. (2001). La violencia en parejas jóvenes [Violence among young partners]. Psicothema, 13(1), 127-131.
  • González-Morga, N., García-Guillamón, G., & Brando, I. (2014). Prevalencia y perfil sociodemográfico del maltrato psíquico, físico y sexual en las pacientes de urgencias en la región de Murcia [Prevalence and socio-demographic profile of mental, physical and sexual abuse in emergency patients in the region of Murcia]. Educación Social, Revista de Intervención Socioeducativa, 57, 156-173.
  • Government Office for Gender Violence. (2012). Macroencuesta de violencia de género 2011 [Macrosurvey of gender violence 2011]. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad.
  • Harding, S. (2004). The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader. London: Routledge.
  • Hatty, S. E. (2000). Masculinities, Violence and Culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Hegelson, V. S. (2002). The psychology of gender. Nueva Jersey: Prentice Hall.
  • Hird, M. (2000). An empirical study of adolescent dating aggression in the U.K. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 69-78.
  • Hlavka, H. (2010). Child sexual abuse and embodiment. Sociological Studies of Children and Youth, 13, 131-165.
  • Hlavka, H. (2013). Legal subjectivity among youth victims of sexual abuse. Law & Social Inquiry, 39, 31-61.
  • Hlavka, H. (2014). Normalizing Sexual Violence Young Women Account for Harassment and Abuse. Gender and Society, 28(3), 337-358.
  • INEGI (2011). Encuesta Nacional sobre la Dinámica de las Relaciones en los Hogares. [National Survey on the Dynamics of Household Relationships]. México D.F.: Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía.
  • Jackson, S. (1999). Issues in the dating violence research: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4, 233-247.
  • Kelly, J., & Johnson, M. (2008). Differentiation among types of intimate partner violence: Research update and implications for interventions. Family Court Review, 46(3), 476-499.
  • Kelly, L. (1987). The continuum of sexual violence. In J. Hanmer, & M. Maynard, Women violence and social control (pp. 46-60). Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International.
  • Kimmel, M. S. (2002). “Gender Symmetry” in Domestic Violence. A Substantive and Methodological Research Review. Violence Against Women, 8(11), 1332-1363.
  • Lamas, M. (2003). La antropología feminista y la categoría “género” [Feminist anthropology and category “gender”] In M. Lamas, El género. La construcción cultural de la diferencia sexual (pp. 97-125). México: Universidad Autónoma de México.
  • Lila, M., Gracia, E., & Murguia, S. (2013). Ajuste psicológico y culpabilización de la víctima en maltratadores: el papel del apoyo social y los eventos vitales estresantes [Psychological adjustment and blaming the victim abusers: the role of social support and stressful life events]. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 5(2).
  • Loseke, D. R. (1992). The Battered Woman and Shelters: The Social Construction of Wife Abuse. New York: State University of New York Press.
  • McKinnon, S. (2005). Neo-liberal Genetics: The Myths and Moral Tales of Evolutionary Psychology. Chicago, ILL: Prickly Paradigm Press.
  • Messick, S. (1980). Test validity and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, 35(11), 1012-1027.
  • Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Lynn, Educational measurement (3th ed.) (pp. 13-104). Washington D.C.: American Council on Education.
  • Messick, S. (1998). Test Validity: A Matter of Consequence. Social Indicators Research, 45, 35-44.
  • Mehrotra, M. (1999). The social construction of wife abuse: Experiences of Asian Indian women in the United States. Violence against Women, 5(6), 619-640.
  • Mojarro-Iñiguez, M., Valdez-Santiago, R., Pérez-Núñez, R., & Salinas Rodríguez (2014). No More! Women Reporting Intimate Partner Violence. Journal of Family Violence, 29, 527-537.
  • Muñoz-Rivas, M., Andreu, J. M., Graña, J. L., & O’Leary, D. K. (2007). Validación de la versión modificada de la Conflicts Tactics Scale Scale [Validation of the modified version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (M-CTS) in a Spanish population of youths]. Psicothema, 19(4), 693-698.
  • Muñoz-Rivas, M., Graña, J., O’Leary, K., & González, M. (2007). Aggression in adolescent dating relationships: prevalence, justification, and health consequences. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40(4), 298-304.
  • Murillo, S. (2000). Relaciones de poder entre hombres y mujeres. Los efectos del aprendizaje de rol en los conflictos y en la violencia doméstica [Power relations between men and women. Learning effects role in conflicts and domestic violence]. Madrid: F.M.P.
  • Pérez, S., Johnson, D. M., & Wright, C. V. (2012). The Attenuating Effect of Empowerment on IPV-Related PTSD Symptoms in Battered Women Living in Domestic Violence Shelters. Violence againts women, 18(1), 102-117.
  • Rodríguez-Franco, L., Antuña, M. Á., López-Cepero, J., Rodríguez-Díaz, F. J., & Bringas, C. (2012). Tolerance towards dating violence in Spanish adolescents. Psicothema, 24(2), 236-242.
  • Schwartz, M. D. (2000). Methodological Issues in the Use of Survey Data for Measuring and Characterizing Violence Against Women. Violence Against Women, 6(8), 815-838.
  • Schwartz, M. D., & DeKeseredy, W. S. (1993). The return of the “battered husband syndorme” through the tupification of women as violent. Crime, law and Social Change, 20, 249-265.
  • Strauss, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and aggression: The Conflict Tactics Scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 75-88.
  • Strauss, M. A. (1989). The Conflict Tactics Scales and Its Critics: An Evaluation and New Data on Validity and Reliability. Durham, NH: Family Research Laboratory.
  • Strauss, M. A. (2004). Prevalence of violence against dating partners by male and female university students worldwide. Violence Against Women, 10, 790-811.
  • Strauss, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The Revised Conlict Tactics Scales (CTS-2). Development and Preliminary Psychometric Data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316.
  • Swahn, M., Alemdar, M., & Whitaker, D. (2010). Nonreciprocal and reciprocal dating violence and injury occurrence among urban youth. Brief Research Report, 9, 264-268.
  • Tolman, D., Spencer, R., Rosen-Reynosa, M., & Porche, M. (2003). Sowing the seeds of violence in heterosexual relationships: Early adolescents narrate compulsory heterosexuality. Journal of Social Issues, 59, 159-178.
  • UNIFEM (2008). A Life Free of Violence: Unleashing the Power of Women’s Empowerment and Gender Equality. New York: United Nations Development Fund for Women.
  • WHO (2013). Violencia de pareja y violencia sexual contra la mujer [Intimate partner violence and sexual violence against women]. Nota informativa No 239. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs239/es/
  • Winstok, Z. (2012). The Effect of Sex and Severity of Aggression on Formal and Informal Social Agents’ Involvement in Partner Violence. American Journal of Men’s Health, 8(3), 136-145.
La source de données: Dialnet