Overview
Type: Acceptance of IPV
Citation: Faramarzi M, Esmailzadeh S, and Mosavi S. A comparison of abused and non-abused women's definitions of domestic violence and attitudes to acceptance of male dominance. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005; 122(2): 225-231.
Use of Scale: Measure
Level of Generality: General
# of Items Reported: 10
Availability: Full
Theme: Gender/social norms, Violence
Demographics
Region: Middle East & North Africa
Country: Iran
Gender: Female
Urban / Rural: nr
Ethnicity: NR
Age Group: Includes adolescents (<18)
Age Range: 93% aged <20
Scale Information
# of Subscales: NR
Subscale Name(s): NR
Direction and Meaning:
Response Range: 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree); total possible score of 50
Internal Consistency: NA
Internal Consistency by Subgroup: NA
Test-retest Reliability: NA
Sample Items: "I think it is the right of a man to: Criticize his wife in front of others; Never stay at home; Not allow his wife to have money"
Items
- I think it is the right of a man to:
- Criticize his wife in front of others
- Never stay at home
- Not allow his wife to have money
- Not allow his wife to earn money
- Not allow his wife to leave the house
- Not allow his wife to communicate with family or friends
- Make decisions for his wife
- Have intercourse without consent of his wife
- Hit his wife
- Think of his wife as property
Measured Outcome(s): IPV perpetration
Outcome(s)
Physical IPV victimization
Detailed Outcome(s) Description
Physical IPV perpetration in the past year (from Abuse Assessment Screen Form)
Statistical Method (Most Adjusted)
Logistic regression
Reference group for gender indicator
Positive attitude toward male dominance (score > 30) vs. negative attitude toward male dominance (score < 30)
Bivariate or Multivariate Analysis?
Multivariate
Detailed Results
Women with positive attitudes toward male dominance were significantly more likely to have experienced physical abuse (aOR: 4.8, 95% CI: 2.9, 8.0, p < 0.001).
Summary
Summary association oriented to reflect the following relationships: Positive association: indicates more inequitable gender views/ divisions of power and greater IPV perpetration; Positive association (reverse coded): reflects more equitable gender views/division of power and lower IPV perpetration; Inverse association: reflects more inequitable gender views/division of power and lower IPV perpetration
Positive association
Covariates
Rural vs urban residence, education, family income, employment, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, age, duration of marriage, parity