教育真的会导致家庭暴力吗?重新审视土耳其的数据

P. Akyol, Murat G. Kïrdar
{"title":"教育真的会导致家庭暴力吗?重新审视土耳其的数据","authors":"P. Akyol, Murat G. Kïrdar","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3934752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using the 2008 Turkish National Survey of Domestic Violence against Women (NSDVW) and the 1997 compulsory schooling policy as an instrument for schooling, Erten and Keskin (2018, henceforth EK), published in AEJ–Applied Economics, find that women's education increases the psychological violence and financial control behavior that they face from their partners. The authors also claim that the incidence of financial control behavior rises because women become more likely to be employed—supporting the instrumental violence hypothesis. They present this evidence only for women who live in what they call “rural areas during childhood”.We first show that the evidence EK provide—which exists only for childhood rural areas—is a result of their misclassification of the rural areas variable. We show that once this variable is defined properly, the evidence for their findings vanishes. Second, ignoring the misclassification of the rural status variable, we demonstrate a number of serious flaws in their empirical analysis: (i) selection bias resulting from the policy altering the composition of women in their sample, (ii) failure of the main identification assumption of RDD for some key outcomes, (iii) failure of the exclusion restriction assumption, (iv) inconsistency in the definition of employment variable across men and women (and a problematic definition of employment of women), (v) elementary mistakes in data cleaning, RDD estimation, and interpretation of the estimates. In addition, the evidence for urban areas contradicts the hypothesis they claim to hold for rural areas.Then, we examine the policy effect on domestic violence outcomes using both 2008 and 2014 TNSDVW datasets. We find null policy effects on psychological violence and almost null effects on women's employment, and positive but statistically insignificant effects on partners' financial control behavior. Hence, our findings do not support the instrumental violence hypothesis, and this holds true for the rural sample as well. The only robust evidence the data provide is that the policy reduces physical violence for women with rural childhood residence.","PeriodicalId":202027,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Other Sexual & Gender Based Violence (Topic)","volume":"286 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Education Really Cause Domestic Violence? Revisiting the Turkish Data\",\"authors\":\"P. Akyol, Murat G. Kïrdar\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3934752\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using the 2008 Turkish National Survey of Domestic Violence against Women (NSDVW) and the 1997 compulsory schooling policy as an instrument for schooling, Erten and Keskin (2018, henceforth EK), published in AEJ–Applied Economics, find that women's education increases the psychological violence and financial control behavior that they face from their partners. The authors also claim that the incidence of financial control behavior rises because women become more likely to be employed—supporting the instrumental violence hypothesis. They present this evidence only for women who live in what they call “rural areas during childhood”.We first show that the evidence EK provide—which exists only for childhood rural areas—is a result of their misclassification of the rural areas variable. We show that once this variable is defined properly, the evidence for their findings vanishes. Second, ignoring the misclassification of the rural status variable, we demonstrate a number of serious flaws in their empirical analysis: (i) selection bias resulting from the policy altering the composition of women in their sample, (ii) failure of the main identification assumption of RDD for some key outcomes, (iii) failure of the exclusion restriction assumption, (iv) inconsistency in the definition of employment variable across men and women (and a problematic definition of employment of women), (v) elementary mistakes in data cleaning, RDD estimation, and interpretation of the estimates. In addition, the evidence for urban areas contradicts the hypothesis they claim to hold for rural areas.Then, we examine the policy effect on domestic violence outcomes using both 2008 and 2014 TNSDVW datasets. We find null policy effects on psychological violence and almost null effects on women's employment, and positive but statistically insignificant effects on partners' financial control behavior. Hence, our findings do not support the instrumental violence hypothesis, and this holds true for the rural sample as well. The only robust evidence the data provide is that the policy reduces physical violence for women with rural childhood residence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":202027,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"WGSRN: Other Sexual & Gender Based Violence (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"286 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"WGSRN: Other Sexual & Gender Based Violence (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3934752\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WGSRN: Other Sexual & Gender Based Violence (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3934752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

Erten和Keskin(2018,以下简称EK)发表在《aej -应用经济学》上的文章利用2008年土耳其全国针对妇女的家庭暴力调查(NSDVW)和1997年义务教育政策作为上学的工具,发现女性教育增加了她们面对伴侣的心理暴力和财务控制行为。作者还声称,财务控制行为的发生率上升是因为女性更有可能被雇佣——这支持了工具暴力假说。他们提出的这一证据仅适用于生活在他们所谓的“童年时期农村地区”的妇女。我们首先表明,EK提供的证据-仅存在于农村儿童地区-是他们对农村地区变量的错误分类的结果。我们表明,一旦这个变量被正确定义,他们发现的证据就消失了。其次,忽略农村地位变量的错误分类,我们在实证分析中发现了一些严重的缺陷:(i)由于政策改变了样本中女性的构成而导致的选择偏差,(ii)对一些关键结果RDD的主要识别假设失败,(iii)排除限制假设失败,(iv)男性和女性就业变量定义不一致(以及对女性就业的有问题的定义),(v)数据清理、RDD估计和估计解释方面的基本错误。此外,城市地区的证据与他们声称对农村地区持有的假设相矛盾。然后,我们使用2008年和2014年的TNSDVW数据集来检验政策对家庭暴力结果的影响。我们发现,政策对心理暴力的影响为零,对女性就业的影响几乎为零,对伴侣财务控制行为的影响为正,但统计上不显著。因此,我们的研究结果不支持工具暴力假说,这也适用于农村样本。数据提供的唯一有力证据是,该政策减少了童年居住在农村的妇女遭受的身体暴力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does Education Really Cause Domestic Violence? Revisiting the Turkish Data
Using the 2008 Turkish National Survey of Domestic Violence against Women (NSDVW) and the 1997 compulsory schooling policy as an instrument for schooling, Erten and Keskin (2018, henceforth EK), published in AEJ–Applied Economics, find that women's education increases the psychological violence and financial control behavior that they face from their partners. The authors also claim that the incidence of financial control behavior rises because women become more likely to be employed—supporting the instrumental violence hypothesis. They present this evidence only for women who live in what they call “rural areas during childhood”.We first show that the evidence EK provide—which exists only for childhood rural areas—is a result of their misclassification of the rural areas variable. We show that once this variable is defined properly, the evidence for their findings vanishes. Second, ignoring the misclassification of the rural status variable, we demonstrate a number of serious flaws in their empirical analysis: (i) selection bias resulting from the policy altering the composition of women in their sample, (ii) failure of the main identification assumption of RDD for some key outcomes, (iii) failure of the exclusion restriction assumption, (iv) inconsistency in the definition of employment variable across men and women (and a problematic definition of employment of women), (v) elementary mistakes in data cleaning, RDD estimation, and interpretation of the estimates. In addition, the evidence for urban areas contradicts the hypothesis they claim to hold for rural areas.Then, we examine the policy effect on domestic violence outcomes using both 2008 and 2014 TNSDVW datasets. We find null policy effects on psychological violence and almost null effects on women's employment, and positive but statistically insignificant effects on partners' financial control behavior. Hence, our findings do not support the instrumental violence hypothesis, and this holds true for the rural sample as well. The only robust evidence the data provide is that the policy reduces physical violence for women with rural childhood residence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信