Antonella Ludmila Zapata-Calvente, Miguel Moya, Jesús L Megías
{"title":"Unveiling the Gender Symmetry Debate: Exploring Consequences, Instructions, and Forms of Violence in Intimate Partner Violence.","authors":"Antonella Ludmila Zapata-Calvente, Miguel Moya, Jesús L Megías","doi":"10.1177/08862605241289477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Official statistics and data from police and judicial systems consistently show that intimate partner violence (IPV) is a worldwide problem predominantly affecting women perpetrated by male partners. Yet, certain behavioral checklists yield similar IPV rates for both genders, sparking the gender symmetry/asymmetry debate. Some possible explanations for this discrepancy reside in (a) considering or not the consequences of violence, (b) possible inadequacies of the instructions given to participants when answering checklists, and (c) considering or not certain behaviors typically asymmetrical (e.g., economic violence). In order to test these three hypotheses, we conducted two studies in the Spanish context using the Partner Victimization Scale (PVS). In Study 1, participants (<i>n</i> = 449) answered a Spanish version of the PVS (with the instructions \"Not including horseplay or joking around\") and reported consequences of violence on their self-esteem and health. In Study 2 (<i>n</i> = 172), we experimentally manipulated the instructions given to participants when answering the PVS (including those of Study 1 or not) and also added some items of typically asymmetrical violence. Other measures of consequences of violence were assessed. Results of Study 1 replicated the original PVSs factor structure and showed gender asymmetry (more female than male victimization) in four of five items, and the victimization rates were related to consequences of violence, providing construct validity to this version of the scale. Results of Study 2 underlined the relevance of the instructions and of the addition of certain types of violence in the symmetry/asymmetry rates informed. Additionally, the IPV reported was associated with worse consequences for women than for men. Our findings suggest that the detection of IPV increases when the instructions are clarified, when certain items are added, and when the consequences of IPV are considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":16289,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","volume":" ","pages":"4346-4371"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241289477","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Official statistics and data from police and judicial systems consistently show that intimate partner violence (IPV) is a worldwide problem predominantly affecting women perpetrated by male partners. Yet, certain behavioral checklists yield similar IPV rates for both genders, sparking the gender symmetry/asymmetry debate. Some possible explanations for this discrepancy reside in (a) considering or not the consequences of violence, (b) possible inadequacies of the instructions given to participants when answering checklists, and (c) considering or not certain behaviors typically asymmetrical (e.g., economic violence). In order to test these three hypotheses, we conducted two studies in the Spanish context using the Partner Victimization Scale (PVS). In Study 1, participants (n = 449) answered a Spanish version of the PVS (with the instructions "Not including horseplay or joking around") and reported consequences of violence on their self-esteem and health. In Study 2 (n = 172), we experimentally manipulated the instructions given to participants when answering the PVS (including those of Study 1 or not) and also added some items of typically asymmetrical violence. Other measures of consequences of violence were assessed. Results of Study 1 replicated the original PVSs factor structure and showed gender asymmetry (more female than male victimization) in four of five items, and the victimization rates were related to consequences of violence, providing construct validity to this version of the scale. Results of Study 2 underlined the relevance of the instructions and of the addition of certain types of violence in the symmetry/asymmetry rates informed. Additionally, the IPV reported was associated with worse consequences for women than for men. Our findings suggest that the detection of IPV increases when the instructions are clarified, when certain items are added, and when the consequences of IPV are considered.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Interpersonal Violence is devoted to the study and treatment of victims and perpetrators of interpersonal violence. It provides a forum of discussion of the concerns and activities of professionals and researchers working in domestic violence, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual assault, physical child abuse, and violent crime. With its dual focus on victims and victimizers, the journal will publish material that addresses the causes, effects, treatment, and prevention of all types of violence. JIV only publishes reports on individual studies in which the scientific method is applied to the study of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Research may use qualitative or quantitative methods. JIV does not publish reviews of research, individual case studies, or the conceptual analysis of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Outcome data for program or intervention evaluations must include a comparison or control group.