ID411 DOMINANCE AND SYMMETRY IN PARTNER VIOLENCE BY MALE AND FEMALE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN 32 NATIONS Murray A. Straus Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire Durham, NH Website: Presented at the New Hampshire Commission on The Status of Men, Concord, NH 30 June 06. Based on paper presented at the conference on Trends In Intimate Violence Intervention, sponsored by the University of Haifa, Israel and New York University. New York City, May 22-25, Other publications on this and related issues can be downloaded from http//: The work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grant T32MH15161 and by the University of New Hampshire

ID412 DOMINANCE AND SYMMETRY IN PARTNER VIOLENCE BY MALE AND FEMALE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN 32 NATIONS SOME RESULTS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL DATING VIOLENCE STUDY Murray A. Straus University Of New Hampshire

ID413 THE ISSUES 1. Is partner violence primarily perpetrated by men, as compared to women, and as compared to both partners engaging in violence? 2. To what extent is dominance by the male partner associated with partner violence, as compared to dominance by the female partner? In short is the issue one of male dominance or one of inequality between partners?  The answers to these questions can have profound implications for prevention and treatment of partner violence.

ID414

5 OBJECTIVES 1.DESCRIBE THE PREVALENCE OF THREE TYPES OF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE Female-Only Male-Only Both Violent 2.TEST HYPOTHESIS THAT DOMINANCE BY ONE PARTNER IS ASSOCIATED WITH AN INCREASED PROBABILITY OF ALL THREE TYPES 3.TEST HYPOTHESIS THAT THIS APPLIES TO DOMINANCE BY FEMALE PARTNERS AS WELL AS MALE PARTNERS 4.SUGGEST THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PREVENTION TREATMENT OF PARTNER VIOLENCE

ID416 OBJECTIVE 1: PREVALENCE OF “MALE-ONLY” “FEMALE-ONLY,” AND “BOTH VIOLENT” TYPES OF PHYSICAL ASSAULT THE REVISED CONFLICT TACTICS SCALES (CTS2) Minor Physical Assault: Threw something at partner that could hurt Twisted my partner’s arm or hair Pushed or shoved my partner Grabbed my partner Slapped my partner Severe Physical Assault: Punched or hit my partner with something that could hurt Choked my partner Slammed my partner against a wall Beat up my partner Burned or scalded my partner Kicked my partner Alpha coefficient of reliability =.88

ID417 NOTE MALE-ONLY VIOLENCE Least frequent everywhere FEMALE-ONLY VIOLENCE Double the rate of Male-Only BOTH-VIOLENT Most common type everywhere

ID418 NOTE MALE-ONLY VIOLENCE Least frequent everywhere FEMALE-ONLY VIOLENCE Double the rate of Male-Only BOTH-VIOLENT Most common type everywhere

ID419 THE HIGHER THE ASSAULT RATE BY STUDENTS IN EACH NATION, THE HIGHER THE SEVERE INJURY RATE, ESPECIALLY FOR ASSAULTS BY MALES r = 57 r =.18 Iran Omitted. 31 Nations

ID4110 CONCLUSIONS ABOUT PREVALENCE AND MUTUALITY OF PHYSICAL ASSAULT  Students in some national settings have lower rates than elsewhere, but the rates are high even in low ranking countries such as Sweden and Portugal  About a third of the violence is “Severe” among these students, as in many other studies, and a substantial percent are injured  Throughout the world, women students physically assault dating partners at about the same rate as men  Male-Only violence is rare among university student couples throughout the world  When there is violence, predominant pattern is Both-Violent  These assaults are a threat to the physical and mental health of students

ID4111 WOMEN HITTING MEN IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM EVEN "HARMLESS" ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ARE SERIOUS AND NEED TO BE A FOCUS OF PREVENTION AND TREATMENT  DANGEROUS FOR WOMEN  HARMFUL TO CHILDREN  A CRIME  MORALLY WRONG  HELPS PERPETUATE THE IMPLICIT CULTURAL NORMS TOLERATING FAMILY VIOLENCE ALSO  A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER ARE NOT PHYSICALLY HARMLESS * A THIRD OF ALL DOMESTIC HOMICIDES ARE BY WOMEN * 10 TO 40% OF PARTNER VIOLENCE INJURIES ARE INFLICTED BY WOMEN

ID4112 F = 14.8*** 7,597 WOMEN. CONTROLLING FOR SOCIAL DESIRABILITY THE “HARMLESS SLAP” BY A WOMEN IS A THREAT TO HER HEALTH 52% of the women in the IDVS approved of slapping a husband’s face. Those who approved were much more likely to have been severely assaulted and injured by their partner

ID4113 OBJECTIVE 2: TEST THE HYPOTHESIS THAT DOMINANCE BY ONE PARTNER IS ASSOCIATED WITH AN INCREASED PROBABILITY OF ALL THREE TYPES PARTNER VIOLENCE METHOD: Multinomial logistic regression INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: Dominance scale score (Personal and Relationships Profile (PRP), Straus et al. 1999) Example items: “I generally have the final say when my partner and I disagree” “My partner needs to remember that I am in charge.” Response categories: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, 4 = Strongly Agree. Scale score: mean of the nine items. Range of scores to 4 A actual range: 1 to 3.96 (mean = 1 95, SD = 0.39).

ID4114 DOMINANCE SCALE Dominance describes relationships that are hierarchical and in which the person with greater advantage uses that advantage to gain status, privilege, or control over his or her partner. 3 dimensions Authority 166DO09. Sometimes I have to remind my partner of who’s boss 103DO6. I generally have the final say when my partner and I disagree 93DO05. My partner needs to remember that I am in charge Disparagement 17DO03R. My partner is basically a good person (R) 7DO02R. People usually like my partner (R) 4DO01. My partner doesn’t have enough sense to make important decisions Restrictiveness 54DO04. I have a right to know everything my partner does 152DO08. I insist on knowing where my partner is at all times 126DO07. I have a right to be involved with anything my partner does

ID4115 DOMINANCE SCALE SCORES IN RANK ORDER OF MALE DOMINANCE SCORE (Mean of students in each nation) Tanzania = most underdeveloped of the 32 Sweden = Nation known for its gender equality legislation Partial correlation with United Nations Gender Empowerment Measure =.69

ID4116 Partial r =.-.69 THE HIGHER THE EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN IN A NATION, THE LOWER THE DOMINANCE OF MEN IN DATING RELATIONSHIPS (29 Nations

ID4117

ID4118

ID4119

ID4120

ID4121

ID4122 FIVE OTHER STUDIES IN KOREA, HONG KONG, MEXICO, AND USA ALSO FIND THAT DOMINANCE BY EITHER A MALE OR FEMALE PARTNER INCREASES THE PROBABILITY OF ASSAULT BY BOTH WOMEN AND MEN INEQUALITY INCREASES THE PROBABILITY OF VIOLENCE, NO MATTER WHO IS DOMINANT

ID4123

ID4124 DOMINANCE IS ONLY ONE OF MANY CAUSES OF PARTNER VIOLENCE AND NOT NECESSARILY THE MOST IMPORTANT SOME OTHER CAUSES FOR WHICH THERE IS EVIDENCE: Alcohol abuse Antisocial and Borderline personality Lack of social skills Impulsivity Stress Depression Next two slides Implicit cultural norms that tolerate low-level violence Corporal punishment

ID4125 A LARGE PERCENT OF STUDENTS AGREE THERE ARE SITUATIONS WHEN THEY WOULD APPROVE OF SLAPPING A PARTNERS FACE THE PERCENT APPROVING A WIFE SLAPPING HER HUSBAND IS ALWAYS HIGHER THAN FOR A HUSBAND SLAPPING THE PERCENT OF WOMEN WHO APPROVE OF A HUSBAND SLAPPING HIS WIFE IS SIMILAR TO THE PERCENT FOR MEN THESE RESULTS PARALLEL W.H.O. STUDIES SHOWING APPROVAL BY WOMEN

ID4126 SPANKING –THE PRIMORDIAL VIOLENCE TEACHES THAT HITTING TO CORRECT MISBEHAVIOR IS MORAL BEHAVIOR

ID4127

ID4128 THE LARGER THE PERCENT WHO EXPERIENCED CORPORAL PUNISHMENT AS A CHILD, THE LARGER THE PERCENT WHO SEVERELY ASSAULTED A PARTNER r =.28 r =.71

ID4129 POLICY AND PROGRAM IMPLICATIONS ABOUT DATING VIOLENCE More recognition needed that:  Dating partner violence is about three times more prevalent than violence between married couples  It is a serious mental and physical health problem  More prevention & treatment effort for students is needed

ID4130 IMPLICATIONS FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT  Victim services should continue to give priority to women because women are injured more, physically, psychologically, & economically  Time for major changes in prevention and offender treatment  Give equal attention to prevention of partner violence by women and treatment of female offenders because:  Women are half the offenders. Ignoring this cripples prevention and treatment efforts  Prevention of female violence needed to protect women because violence by women is a major contributor to victimization of women. Therefore efforts to end partner violence by women will contribute to protecting women  Abandon the single-cause fallacy of male-dominance and attend to:  Dominance by either partner  The multiplicity of other factors, including the primordial violence spanking children  The similarity of causes of violence by men and women

ID4131 IT IS TIME TO MAKE THE FOCUS Ending All Family violence Starting with spanking children Including violence BY women, not just violence against women ONLY THEN WILL WOMEN, AS WELL AS ALL OTHER HUMAN BEINGS, BE SAFE IN THEIR OWN HOMES

ID4132 END FOR SOC 695

ID4133

ID4134 PURPORTED DEFECTS OF THE STUDY MANY REAL LIMITATIONS, BUT NONE OF THOSE ALLEGED See the limitations section of the paper available on DEFECT 1: TWO THIRDS OF SAMPLE ARE WOMEN AND THAT EXPLAINS MORE VIOLENCE BY WOMEN It does not because we computed the percent of the women who hit a partner and the percent of the men who hit a partner. DEFECT 2: RESULTS ARE CONTRADICTED BY CASES WE SEE They are different, but not contradicted. What is contradicted is the belief that cases seen in shelters and by police are typical. They are the tip of the iceberg, are very important, but not typical. The typical case is mutual violence. Shelters or police are almost never involved, even though it causes serious psychological injury and sometimes physical injury to the partners and to children in the home. DEFECT 3: RESULTS ARE CONTRADICTED BY FBI AND NATIONAL CRIME SURVEY AND OTHER POLICE STATISTICS Crime statistics, of course, represent only the type of cases that get involved in the legal system. Police call data is, at most 1/80 th of the annual cases. They are very important and should have priority for services. But they are far far from typical and do not contradict the findings from over 200 studies showing about equal rates and a predominance of mutual violence..

ID4135 DEFECT 4: MEASURED ONLY ACTS OF VIOLENCE, NOT THE CONSEQUENCES The study measured several consequences, including injury and depression and found that male victims were often injured or depressed. Attacks by women account for about a third of all physical injuries from partner violence, including a third of those that are fatal. Male partners of violent women have increased rates of depression, but the increase is not as great as for female victims. Although women cause less injury, they cause a lot and the victims deserve help. DEFECT 5: DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE “FACT” THAT MOST VIOLENCE BY WOMEN IS SELF-DEFENSE The studies actually show that only a small percent of partner violence (5% to 15%) by either men or women is in self-defense. A large percent by both men and women is retaliation for being hit by a partner. This is one of the reasons mutual violence is predominant. DEFECT 6: DOES NOT RECOGNIZE THAT MOST VIOLENCE BY WOMEN IS TO END DOMINATION AND OPPRESSION Those who claim this have not read the study because that was one of the main issues. We did find that domination by a partner is ONE of the important causes, but only one of many. We found that domination by either the male or female partner was related to an increased likelihood of violence. In addition, violence is not a moral or legal way to end domination by either a male or female partner.

ID4136

ID4137 TYPES AND RATES AND PARTNER VIOLENCE IN AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS Chart by Kenneth Corvo, based on a national sample of 2,143 household as reported in Straus, 1980, Amer. Behavioral Scientist, and other data.

ID4138

ID4139 BOTH MALE AND FEMALE STUDENTS HAVE HUGE RATES OF ASSAULT EQUAL RATES FOR MEN AND WOMEN STUDENTS LARGE NATION-TO- NATION DIFFERENCES

ID4140

ID4141 WOMEN STUDENTS INFLICTED ONLY A THIRD AS MUCH INJURY AS THE MEN IN THIS STUDY

ID4142 WOMEN STUDENTS INFLICT ONLY A TENTH AS MUCH SEVERE INJURY AS THE MEN IN THIS STUDY THESE INJURY RATES SHOW THAT VIOLENCE BETWEEN DATING PARTNERS IS A SERIOUS CRIME WITH HARMFUL EFFECTS

ID4143 N=8,000 RATE =1.3%

ID4144 Males Females ID28

ID4145 DOMINANCE BY ONE PARTNER IS ASSOCIATED WITH A HIGHER RATE OF PARTNER VIOLENCE r = 0.44` Partial r =.39 DOMINANCE TOTAL (MEAN) ASSAULT TOTAL PERPETRATION 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% ISR-EMEK DEU-FREI GBR-SCTL BEL-FLEM PRT-BRAG CHE-GERM CHE-FREN NDL-AMST NZL-CHRI AUS-ADEL SGP-SING KOR-PUSA HKG-HONG IND-PUNE USA-PENN USA-WDC USA-INDI USA-TX-NC USA-LOUI USA-MISS USA-NH 2 USA-CINC USA-UTAH USA-TX-N M USA-TX-M USA-NH 1 CAN-TORO CAN-MONT CAN-LOND CAN-WINN CAN-HAMI BRA-SAOP MEX-JUAR r =.45, Partial r = 39

ID4146 CONCLUSIONS ABOUT PREVALENCE OF PARTNER VIOLENCE  THE HIGH RATES OF ASSAULT, INJURY, SEXUAL COERCION WORLD-WIDE ARE AN IMPORTANT THREAT TO PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH  RATES OF PHYSICAL ASSAULT BY WOMEN ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE BY MEN  GENDER SYMMETRY IN PHYSICAL ASSAULT MAY BE CHARACTERISTIC OF ALL SOCIETIES EXCEPT WHERE WOMEN ARE TOTALLY DOMINATED  RESULTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH MANY OTHER STUDIES OF STUDENT COUPLES 

ID4147 CONCLUSIONS ABOUT DOMINANCE  DOMINANCE BY WOMEN AS WELL AS BY MEN IS ASSOCIATED WITH A HIGHER PROBABILITY OF VIOLENCE  RESULTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS STUDIES OF DOMINANCE IN THE US, KOREA, HONG KONG, AND MEXICO  RESULTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH REVIEW OF GENDER DIFFERENCES IN RISK FACTORS: THEY ARE MOSTLY THE SAME FOR WOMEN AND MEN (Medeiros & Straus, 2006)

ID4148 THE LARGER THE PERCENT WHO EXPERIENCED CORPORAL PUNISHMENT AS A CHILD, THE LARGER THE PERCENT WHO ASSAULTED A PARTNER r =.12 r =.52

ID4149 Any AssaultSevere Assault Figure 1. PERCENT OF VIOLENT COUPLES IN EACH MUTUALITY TYPE %

ID4150  CORRELATION OF SOCIAL DESIRABILITY SCALE WITH KEY VARIABLES For CTS measures of partner violence: average of about -.20 For PRP measures of risk factors: average is about -.30  IMPORTANT TO CONTROL BECAUSE Differences between sites and between men and women could reflect differences in willingness to disclose criminal acts such as physical or sexual aggression CONTROL FOR SOCIAL DESIRABILITY

ID4151 THE INTERNATIONAL DATING VIOLENCE STUDY (IDVS)  68 UNIVERSITIES IN 32 NATIONS – ALL MAJOR WORLD REGIONS  QUESTIONNAIRE (ONE CLASS PERIOD). FOUR PARTS 1.Demographics 2.Conflict Tactics Scales to measure Partner Violence 3. Personal And Relationships Profile (23 risk factors for PV) 4. Questions added by each consortium member. Examples: `Importance of "saving face" Perceived deterrent effects of sanctions Religious affiliation and beliefs  ALL ANALYSES CONTROL FOR OR EXAMINE INTERACTIONS WITH * Gender * Age * Score on Social Desirability Response-set scale * Other variables needed for specific analyses

ID4152

ID4153 NOTE ASSAULT RATE High every where but also big differences between nations MEN AND WOMEN A larger percent of women than men hit a partner in two thirds of the nations,