ID92 1 Murray A. Straus Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire Durham, NH 03824 603-862-2594 [email protected]Website: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2 • Presented at the International Association of Mental Health Services annual meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 26 May 2010 • Other publications on this and related issues can be downloaded from http//:www.pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2 • The work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grant T32MH15161 and by the University of New Hampshire MENTAL HEALTH AND VIOLENCE BETWEEN MARITAL AND DATING PARTNERS ACROSS THE LIFE SPAN AND IN 32 NATIONS
Transcript
ID92 1
Murray A. StrausFamily Research Laboratory, University of New HampshireDurham, NH 03824 603-862-2594 [email protected]
Website: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2
• Presented at the International Association of Mental Health Services annual meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 26 May 2010• Other publications on this and related issues can be downloaded from http//:www.pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2• The work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grant T32MH15161 and by the University of New Hampshire
MENTAL HEALTH AND VIOLENCE BETWEEN MARITAL AND DATING PARTNERS ACROSS THE LIFE SPAN AND IN 32 NATIONS
ID92 2
QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED1. What is the prevalence of physical assault on partners
A. Over the life courseB. By men and womenC. In economically developed and developing nations?
2. To what extent are mental health problems a risk factor for partner violence?
3. Is the relation of mental health problems to partner assault different:• For men and women?• In economically developed and developing nations?
4. What are the implications for prevention and treatment of physical violence against partners?
A. Answer using results of several studies, but especially theInternational Dating Violence Study
ID92 3
QUESTION 1
What is the prevalence of physical assault on partners(“Partner violence” or PV from here on)
A. By men and womenB. Over the life courseC. In economically developed and developing nations?
All data is on perpetration
PHYSICAL ASSAULT SCALEOf The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales *
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 • Used a knife or gun on my partner
Alpha: By participant - Males = .786, Females = .774, Total = .777 By partner - Males = .785, Females = .802, Total = .797
* For papers on this test, see http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2ID92
4
ID92 5
Table 1. Ten Examples of the More Than 200 Studies Showing Gender Symmetry in Perpetration of Physical. Assault
Study Severity Of Assault
Perpetrator
Male Female
Canadian National Survey (Lupri, 1990) Minor Severe
17.8%10.1%
23.3%12.9%
Canadian General Social Survey (1999) Overall rate 7.0% 8.0%\
British Crime Survey (1996) Overall rate
4.2% 4.1%
National Co-morbidity Study (Kessler, 2001) Minor Severe
17.4%6.5%
17.7%6.2%
National Alcohol and Family Violence Survey (Straus, 1995) Overall rate Severe
9.1% 1.9%
9.5% 4.5%
Dunedin Health and Development Study (US Dept of justice 1999) Overall rate 27.0 % 34.0%
National Violence Against Women Survey (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000) Overall rate 1.3% 0.9%
Youth Risk Behavior Survey (Centers For Disease Control, 2006) Overall rat 8.8% 8.9%
National Youth Survey (Wofford-Mihalic, Elliott, & Menard,,1994). Overall Severe
20.2% 5.7%
34.1% 3.8%
% of Emergency room visits for PV (Annals of Emergency Medicine) 19.0% 20.0%
ID92 6
EVEN IN MALE-DOMINANT NATIONS,MORE GIRLS HIT PARTNERS THAN BOYS
• World Health Organization - Global School-based Health Survey• Students 13 to 15 years old• Asked if they had been hit, slapped or hurt on purpose by a boyfriend
Global School-based Health Survey. Geneva: World Health Organization 2006 http://www.cdc.gov/gshs or http://www.who.int/school_youth_health/gshs This data has now been removed from the WHO files.
ID92 7
THE INTERNATIONAL DATING VIOLENCE STUDY
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID.htm
17,404 Students At 68 Universities
In 32 Nations
All Major World Regions
Convenience Samples Questionnaire Completed In Class
Analyses Control For And/Or Examines Interactions With:
* Gender and Age * Score on Social Desirability
Response set scale * Other controls as needed for specific
analyses
VALIDITY OF THE DATA• Concurrent validity: correlated with
recognized international statistics
• Construct Validity: Show in many published papers
ID92 8
ASSAULT, TOTAL - BY PARTNER % in rank order of national context (CTATPP_1J)
Median: Total = 25.0%, Males = 24.8%, Females = 26.2%, F% of M = 106%
High Half Of Nations Low Half Of Nations
TotalTotal Male Feml TotalTotal Male Feml
Iran 41.041.0 43.0 40.0 South Korea 24.724.7 19.5 28.3
Russia 28.028.0 29.2 27.1 Switzerland 17.717.7 23.3 16.0
Romania 27.927.9 41.7 26.4 Japan 17.317.3 19.4 15.5
United StatesUnited States 27.927.9 29.1 27.3 Sweden 16.916.9 22.7 15.1
China 27.027.0 24.7 28.4 Malta 16.516.5 31.8 12.3
China-Hong K 25.425.4 24.1 26.0 Portugal 13.613.6 11.9 14.5
Netherlands 25.225.2 31.3 24.3 Israel 12.612.6 15.8 11.9
ID92 9
ASSAULT RATE High everywhere but also big differences between nations
Percent of women who assault partner is similar to the percent of men in all nations
ASSAULT, SEVERESEVERE - BY PARTNER % in rank order of national context (CTASPP_1) Median: Total = 9.1%, Males = 9.1%, Females = 8.5%, F% of M = 93%
High Half Of Nations Low Half Of Nations
TotalTotal Male Feml TotalTotal Male Feml
Tanzania 17.117.1 12.4 12.9 Russia 9.19.1 8.2 2.5
Greece 15.615.6 16.4 11.4 Canada 8.08.0 7.8 15.0
Iran 15.315.3 17.4 8.5 Belgium 7.87.8 5.3 8.1
Mexico 15.115.1 9.1 2.7 Germany 7.67.6 8.1 15.3
India 14.714.7 9.1 5.7 Japan 6.86.8 4.8 6.2
China 13.613.6 11.5 13.4 Brazil 6.56.5 7.7 3.7
China -Taiwan 13.613.6 15.4 10.3 Hungary 6.26.2 9.8 14.7
Great BritainGreat Britain 13.413.4 13.6 9.4 New Zealand 6.26.2 7.1 9.1
Venezuela 13.413.4 14.3 12.9 Portugal 5.85.8 5.1 9.7
South Korea 12.612.6 9.1 16.3 Israel 5.75.7 5.3 15.0
South Africa 11.911.9 18.0 10.8 Lithuania 4.94.9 2.3 4.9
China-Hong K 11.111.1 10.2 16.4 Malta 4.94.9 4.5 5.9
United StatesUnited States 10.510.5 10.9 10.8 Switzerland 4.74.7 8.2 7.4
Australia 9.49.4 11.9 6.0 Singapore 4.24.2 3.0 13.0
Romania 9.49.4 12.5 4.7 Netherlands 3.93.9 12.5 6.2
Guatemala 9.19.1 8.8 4.5 Sweden 2.72.7 3.1 17.0
ID92 10
Rates of severe severe assault also high
Approximately equal rates for men and women also applies to severe assaults
ID92 11
ASSAULTS ON MARITAL AND DATING PARTNERSDECREASES OVER THE LIFE COURSE
* For men and women* In economically developed and developing nations
ID92 13
DECREASE IN SPOUSAL ASSAULT IN FIRST SEVEN YEARS OF MARRIAGE*
383 newlywed couples. At the time of marriage, and Yr 1, 2, 4, & 7
* Brian M. Quigley, Lorig Kachadourian, & Kenneth E. Leonard
H toW W to H Assault
K. Leonard et al
ID92 14
DOMESTIC ASSAULTS BY BOTH MEN AND WOMEN DECLINE WITH AGE British National Crime Survey, 1996
Mirrlees-Black, C. (1999). Domestic Violence: Findings from a new British Crime Survey self-completion questionnaire: A Research, development and statistics directorate report (Vol. Home Office Research Study 191). London: Home
Office.
ID92
16
WHEN THERE IS VIOLENCE MUTUAL VIOLENCE PREDOMINATES SIX OF THE 17 GENERAL POPULATION STUDIES SHOWING MUTUAL VIOLENCE PREDOMINATES, EXCEPT FOR KOREA
Among Violent Couples:
StudyBoth
ViolentMaleOnly
Female Only
1. National Family Violence Survey,1975 48% 25% 27%
2. National Co-morbidity Survey. 1990-02 54% 23% 24%
3. National Long. Study of Adolescent Health, 2001 50% 15% 35%
4. International Dating Violence Study, 2001-06 55% 16% 29%
5. International Parenting Study 2008 39% 11% 29%
6. Korean national survey - Any Violence Severe Violence
12%17%
49%70%
11%13%
1. Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980 (2006)). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family New York: Doubleday/Anchor Books (Re-issued Transaction Publications, 2006 with a new forward)
2..As reported by women. Kessler, R. C., Molnar, B. E., Feurer, I. D., & Appelbaum, M. (2001). Patterns and mental health predictors of domestic violence in the United States: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey. International Journal Of Law And Psychiatry, 24(4-5), 487-508.
3..Whitaker, D. J., Haileyesus, T., Swahn, M., & Saltzman, L. S. (2007). Differences in Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships With Reciprocal and Nonreciprocal Intimate Partner Violence American Journal of Public Health, 97(5), 941-947.
4. Straus, M. A. (2008). Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 252-275.
5. Straus, M. A. (2009). Violence between parents reported by male and female university students: Prevalence, severity, chronicity, and mutuality. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 1(1), 4-12..
6.. Kim, Jae-Yop and Emery, Clifton (2003) Marital Power, Conflict, Norm Consensus, and Marital Violence in a Nationally Representative Sample of Korean Couples. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 18:197-219.
ID92 17Straus, M. A. (2007). Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 252-275.
Study of 14,252 students in a dating relationship. This chart is for the 4,239 who reported one or more incidents of violence.
MUTUALITY OF ASSAULT PERPETRATION IN DATING RELATIONSHIPS OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN 32 NATIONS
ASSAULT ,TOTAL - % BOTH VIOLENT (AMONG VIOLENT RELATIONSHIPS)AS REPORTED BY MEN AND WOMEN (In rank order of national context (CUAT_3)
Median: Total = 68.7%, Males = 74.3%, Females = 67.3%
Israel 64.064.0 75.0 61.9 China-Hong K 47.547.5 70.6 42.7
CanadaCanada 61.561.5 63.0 61.1 New Zealand 46.746.7 50.0 46.2
South Africa 61.161.1 100.0 56.3 Singapore 46.246.2 0.0 54.5
Mexico 60.560.5 50.0 61.8 Romania 44.144.1 66.7 41.9
Great Britain 59.759.7 33.3 63.5 Hungary 42.142.1 57.1 33.3
Greece 59.159.1 58.3 59.4 China 39.839.8 38.1 40.3
China -Taiwan 58.358.3 100.0 50.0 Sweden 25.025.0 40.0 21.1
Switzerland 57.157.1 83.3 46.7 Malta 24.024.0 0.0 14.3
According to both women & men: mutual violence is predominant for severe assaults as well as minor assaults
Percent mutual is close to results of other studies
19ID92
ID92 20
IN ALL 32 NATIONS IN THE INTERNATIONAL DATING VIOLENCE STUDY, AND IN OVER 200 OTHER STUDIES THAT
HAVE DATA FOR BOTH MEN AND WOMEN(Most studies obtain data only on female victims/male perpetrators)
About the same percent of women as men physically assault a partnerWhen there is violence, the most prevalent pattern is mutual violenceAbout the same percent of women as men are the first to hitSelf –defense is rarely the instigating cause of assaults by women or men
(Slides available on my) websiteThe main instigating cause is anger over a behavior of the partner such as
o Failure to do household choreso Infidelityo Moneyo Child care and management etc
ID92 21
IS MUTUALITY A RESULT OF SELF-DEFENSE BY WOMEN?
World Health Organization report on violence (Krug, 2002)“Where violence by women occurs it is more likely to be in the form of
self-defense (32, 37, 38)” What do references 32, 37, and 38 really show?All three asserted that women's violence was primarily in self-defense, but:
#32 Saunders reports that 70% of the minor violence and 60% of the severe violence was NOT in self-defense
#37 DeKesseredy et al. 37% of the minor violence and 43% of the severe violence was initiated by women.
#38 Johnson & Ferraro (Michael P. Johnson & Ferraro, 2000) cites references 32 and 37 but presents no new data
Six other studies report data on self-defense* Five of the six found only a small percentage of female violence was
in self-defense * One found high rates of self-defense, but percent in self-defense was
slightly greater for men (56%) than for women (42%) (Harned, 2001)
ID92 22
OTHER DATA THAT CONTRADICTS THE SELF-DEFENSE EXPLANATION
About the same percent of women as men are the first to hit (Straus, 2005)About a quarter of partner-violence is female only (see previous table) Most usual proximate motivations for violence by women, like motivations of
men, are:o Angero Coercion to do or stop doing somethingo Punishing partner’s misbehavior (Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Fiebert &
Gonzalez, 1997; Pearson, 1997)Example:
Pearson (1997): 90% of women studied assaulted their partner because they were furious or jealous, or frustrated, not to defend themselves.
MUTUAL VIOLENCE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT BECAUSE
Associated with 2 to 5 times higher rate of injury
When violence is mutual there is little difference in injury rates for men and women
This applies to injury sustained and injury inflicted by women and by men, and as reported by women as well as by men
An additional reason why prevention and treatment must address `women as well as men
Essential to recognize for effective treatment
ID92 23
ID92 24
WOMEN SUFFER MORE INJURY THE HIGHER THE ASSAULT RATE BY STUDENTS IN EACH NATION,
THE HIGHER THE SEVERE INJURY RATE,
r = 57 r = .18
Iran Omitted. 31 Nations
ID92 25
ID92 26
16 Scales For Individual CharacteristicsASP Antisocial Personality SymptomsBOR Borderline Personality SymptomsCH Criminal HistoryDEP Depressive SymptomsGHM Gender Hostility To MenGHW Gender Hostility to WomenLD Limited Disclosure POS Positive ParentingPTS Post-Traumatic Stress SymptomsSUB2 Alcohol AbuseSUB 3 Drug AbuseSC Self-ControlSI Social IntegrationSTR Stressful ConditionsSAH Sexual Abuse HistoryVA Violence ApprovalVS Violent Socialization
THE PERSONAL AND RELATIONSHIPS PROFILE (PRP)Measures 25 Risk Factors For Partner Violence
8 Scales For Couple Relationships
(Behavior towards or beliefs about the partner)
AM Poor Anger ManagementCP Communication ProblemsCON ConflictDOM DominanceJEL JealousyNA Negative AttributionRC Relationship CommitmentRD Relationship DistressThis test is available
on my website
Assault Scale
Anti-Social Personality F=33.5, p<.001
(Anti-Social Personality Quintiles)
ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY IS ASSOCIATED WITH AN 89% INCREASE IN ASSAULT (COMPARING LOWEST AND HIGHEST SCORING FIFTH)
LINK BETWEEN ALCOHOL ABUSE ALCOHOL ABUSE & ASSAULT APPLIES TO BOTH MEN AND WOMEN
51ID92
Assault Scale
Drug Abuse F=16.6, p<.001
Drug Abuse (Terciles)
DRUG ABUSE DRUG ABUSE IS ASSOCIATED WITH A 29% INCREASE IN THE ASSAULT SCALE SCORE
52ID92
Assault Scale
Female
Male
Drug Abuse F=16.6, p<.001Gender F=84.3, p<.001Drug Abuse*Gender F=.05, p=.95
Drug Abuse(Terciles)
THE LINK BETWEEN DRUG ABUSE DRUG ABUSE & ASSAULT APPLIES TO BOTH MEN AND WOMEN
53ID92
ID92 54
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS1.Partner violence may the most frequent type of assault
2.Like other acts of violence and other crime, it declines rapidly with age
3.Most partner violence is mutual
4.Retaliation is common, self-defense is a low percent of partner violence
5.At least 7 types of Mental health problems are risk factors for partner violence
6.All five of the above apply to:* Women as well as men* In developing as well as economically developed
nations
ALL OF THE RELATIONSHIPS SHOWNARE “RISK FACTORS” NOT A ONE-TO-ONE CAUSE
A Condition Which Increases The Probability Of A Disease Or Problem
EXAMPLES:–Smoking And Death From Smoking Related Disease
1/3 will die by age 65 a from smoking related disease – which means that 2/3 will not--Pregnancy With HIV And Child Born With HIV
“Only” 20% are born with HIV, i.e. 80% are not--Corporal Punishment As A Child And Assaulting A Partner
Percent assaulting increased form 8 to 24% -- 3 times morewhich means that 76% of those spanked the most do
not assault
Almost all social science and most medical research results are like this. Risk factors not one-to-one relationships
ID92 55
ID92 56
QUESTION 4 What are the implications?
A. THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS Change conceptualization of partner violence
From: A manifestation of “patriarchy” as THE causeTO: Family system conceptualization which recognizes that:
• Most partner violence is mutual• Patriarchal dominance is just one of many causes• Mental health and social skill problems are often a cause
ID92
57
ID92 58
SOME REFERENCES ON THE INTERNATIONAL DATING VIOLENCE STUDYDouglas, E. M., & Straus, M. A. (2006). Assault and injury of dating partners by university students In 19 countries and its relation to corporal punishment experienced as a child. European journal of criminology, 3(3), 293-318.Feld, S. L., & Straus, M. A. (1989). Escalation and desistance of wife assault in marriage. Criminology, 27(1), 141-161.Hines, Denise A. and Murray A. Straus. 2007. "Binge Drinking and Violence Against Dating Partners: The Mediating Effect of Antisocial Traits and Behaviors in a Multi-National Perspective." Aggressive Behavior 33:441-457.Medeiros, Rose A. and Murray A. Straus. 2006. "Risk factors for physical violence between dating partners: Implications for gender-inclusive prevention and treatment of family violence. ." Pp. 59-87 in Family approaches to domestic violence: a practioners guide to gender-inclusive research and treatment, edited by J. C. Hamel and T. Nicholls: Springer (http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2)Rebellon, Cesar J., Murray A. Straus, and Rose Anne Medeiros. 2008. "Self-control in global perspective: An Empirical assessment of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory within and across 32 national settings." European journal of criminology 5:331-362.Straus, M. A. & International Dating Violence Research Consortium. (2004). Prevalence of violence against dating partners by male and female university students worldwide. Violence Against Women, 10(7), 790-811.Straus, M. A. (1999). The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis. In X. Ariaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships (pp. 17-44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Straus, M. A. (2001). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American families and its effects on children, 2nd edition (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
ID92 59
Straus, M. A. (2004). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the revised conflict tactics scales: A study of university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(4), 407-432.Straus, M. A. (2009). Gender symmetry in partner violence: Evidence and implications for prevention and treatment. In D. J. Whitaker & J. R. Lutzker (Eds.), Preventing partner violence: Research and evidence-based intervention strategies (pp. 245-271). Washington D.C. : American Psychological Association.Straus, M. A. (2009). Why the overwhelming evidence on partner physical violence by women has not been perceived and is often denied. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 18(6), 552-571.Straus, M. A. (2009). The National context effect: An Empirical test of the validity of Cross-National research using unrepresentative samples. Cross-Cultural Research, 43(3), 183-205.Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1990). Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.Straus, M. A., & Ramirez, I. L. (2004). Criminal history and assaults of dating partners: The role of type of prior crime, age of onset, and gender. Violence & Victims, 19(4), 413-434.Straus, M. A., & Ramirez, I. L. (2007). Gender symmetry in prevalence, severity, and chronicity of physical aggression against dating partners by University students in Mexico and USA. Aggressive Behavior, 33, 1-10. Straus, M. A., & Savage, S. A. (2005). Neglectful behavior by parents in the life history of university students in 17 countries and its relation to violence against dating partners. Child Maltreatment, 10(2), 124-135Straus, M. A., Douglas, E. M., & Medeiros, R. A. (in preparation. The primordial violence: Corporal punishment by parents, cognitive development, and crime. .
ID92 60
SELF-DEFENSE REFERENCESCarrado, M., George, M. J., Loxam, E., Jones, L., & Templar, D. (1996). Aggression in british heterosexual relationships: A
descriptive analysis. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 401-415.Cascardi, M., & Vivian, D. (1995). Context for specific episodes of marital violence: Gender and severity of violence
differences. Journal of Family Violence, 10, 265-293.Cascardi, M., & Vivian, D. (1995). Context for specific episodes of marital violence: Gender and severity of violence
differences. Journal of Family Violence, 10, 265-293.Dekeseredy, W. S., Saunders, D. G., Schwartz, M. D., & Shahid, A. (1997). The meanings and motives for women's use of
violence in Canadian college dating relationships: Results from a national survey. Sociological Spectrum, 17, 199-222.Felson, R. B., & Messner, S. F. (1998). Disentangling the effects of gender and intimacy on victem precipitation in homicide.
Criminology, 36, 405-423.Follingstad, D. R., Wright, S., Lloyd, S., & Sebastian, J. A. (1991). Sex differences in motivations and effects in dating
violence. Family Relations, 40, 51-57.Harned, M. S. (2001). Abused women or abused men? An examination of the context and outcomes of dating violence.
Violence and Victims, 16, 269-285.Johnson, M. P., & Ferraro, K. J. (2000). Research on domestic violence in the 1990's: Making distinctions. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 62, 948-963.Jurik, N. C., & Gregware, P. (1989). A method for murder: An interactinist analysis of homicides by women. School of Justice
Studies, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.Krug, E. G., Dahlberg, L. L., Mercy, J. A., Zwi, A. B., Lozano, R., & World Health Organization. (2002). World report on
violence and health. Geneva: World Health Organization.Pearson, P. (1997). When she was bad: Women and the myth of innocence. Toronto: Random House.Pearson, P. (1997). When she was bad: Women and the myth of innocence. Toronto: Random House.Sarantakos, S. (1998). Husband abuse as self-defence, International Congress of Sociology. Montreal, Canada.Saunders, D. G. (1986). When battered women use violence: Husband-abuse or self-defense? Violence and Victims, 1, 47-
60.Sommer, R. (1996). Male and female perpetrated partner abuse: Testing a diathesis-stress model. Winnepeg, Manitoba:
University of Manitoba, PhD Dissertation. Straus, M. A. (2005). Women's violence toward men is a serious social problem. In D. R. Loseke, R. J. Gelles & M. M.
Cavanaugh (Eds.), Current controversies on family violence (2nd ed., pp. 55-77). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
NATION ABBREVIATIONS(for those who download the slides)
AUS Australia; BEL Belgium; BRA Brazil; CAN Canada; CHE Switzerland; CHN China; DEU Germany; GBR Great Britain; GRC Greece; GTM Guatemala; HKG ong Kong; HUN Hungary; IND India; IRN Iran; ISR Israel; JPN Japan; KOR South Korea; LTU Lithuania; MEX Mexico; MLT Malta; NLD Netherlands; NZL New Zealand; PRT Portugal; ROU Romania; RUS Russia; SGP Singapore; SWE Sweden; TWN Taiwan; TZA Tanzania; USA United States; VEN Venezuela; ZAF S Africa
ID92 61
ID92 62
Medeiros, R. A., & Straus, M. A. (2006). Risk factors for physical violence between dating partners: Implications for gender-inclusive prevention and treatment of family violence. . In J. C. Hamel & T. Nicholls (Eds.), Family approaches to domestic violence: a practioners guide to gender-inclusive research and treatment (pp. 59-87): Springer (also available at http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2)
Example of cause that is not a mental
health problem
THE MORE DOMINANCE BY ONE PARTNER, THE HIGHER THE PROBABILITY OF AN ASSAULT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER
IN THREE OF THE FOUR LEVELS OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THE HIGHER THE DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS SCORE, THE
HIGHER THE RATE OF ASSAULT
Depressive Symptoms (Quintiles)63ID92
ID92 64
Partial r = .-.69
THE HIGHER THE EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN IN A NATION, THE LOWER THE DOMINANCE OF MEN IN DATING RELATIONSHIPS (29 Nations
Assault
r=.53
65
THE HIGHER THE DRUG ABUSE DRUG ABUSE SCORE OF STUDENTS IN A NATION, THE HIGHER THE AVERAGE ASSAULT SCORE FOR
THAT NATION
Drug Abuse(Mean for students in each nation)ID92
Assault
r=.38 r=.52
66
Men Women
THE DRUG ABUSE DRUG ABUSE & ASSAULT LINK IS STRONGER FOR ASSAULTS BY WOMEN THAN BY MEN, EVEN FEWER WOMEN ABUSE DRUGS
Drug Abuse(Mean for students in each nation)ID92
Assault
r=.27 r=.13
67
Men Women
THE LINK BETWEEN ALCOHOL ABUSE ALCOHOL ABUSE & ASSAULT IS STRONGER FOR ASSAULTS
BY WOMEN THAN BY MEN, EVEN THOUGH WOMEN HAVE LOWER ALCOHOL ABUSE
Alcohol Abuse(Mean for students in each nation)
Alcohol Abuse(Mean for students in each nation)ID92
Assault
r=.23
68
THE HIGHER THE ALCOHOL ABUSE ALCOHOL ABUSE SCORE OF STUDENTS IN A NATION, THE LOWER THE AVERAGE ASSAULT SCORE FOR THAT
NATION
Alcohol Abuse(Mean for students in each nation)
ID92
r=.34 r=.66
Assault
69
THE LINK BETWEEN BORDERLINE PERSONALITY BORDERLINE PERSONALITY & ASSAULT IS STRONGER FOR ASSAULT BY WOMEN THAN BY MEN
Borderline Personality Symptoms(Mean for students in each nation)
Men Women
ID92
Assault
r=.22 r=.59
70
Men Women
THE LINK BETWEEN POST TRAUMATIC STRESS POST TRAUMATIC STRESS & ASSAULT IS STRONGER FOR ASSAULTS BY WOMEN THAN BY MEN
Post Traumatic Stress Symptoms(Mean for students in each nation)ID92
Assault Scale
Risk Factor Index F=38.1, p<.001
Mental Health Risk Factor Index (Quintiles)
THE COMBINATION OF ALL SEVEN MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS COMBINATION OF ALL SEVEN MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS HAS THE STRONGEST RELATION TO ASSAULTING A DATING PARTNER
THE COMBINATION OF ALL SEVEN MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS COMBINATION OF ALL SEVEN MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS IS STRONGLY RELATED TO ASSAULTING A DATING PARTNER BY BOTH
COMBINATION OF ALL SEVEN MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS COMBINATION OF ALL SEVEN MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS IS STRONGLY RELATED TO ASSAULTING A PARTNER AT ALL FOUR LEVELS
OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
73
74
The Average Score For Male Students Is Higher Than The Score Of Female StudentsFor All Mental Health Problems Except PTS Symptoms (all differences significant)
![AUTOMOTIVE ETHERNET CONSORTIUM · Automotive Ethernet Consortium 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100 . Durham, NH 03824 . University of New Hampshire Phone: (603) 862-0090 . ... Reference [1]](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5fcf485e0fc8ad61be3ce230/automotive-ethernet-consortium-automotive-ethernet-consortium-21-madbury-rd-suite.jpg)
