It’s Not all or Nothing: Women’s Differential Use of Help-Seeking Strategies in Response to Intimate Partner Violence

IF 2.7 3区 心理学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES Journal of Family Violence Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1007/s10896-024-00717-9
Lynette M. Renner, Carolyn Copps Hartley, Knute D. Carter
{"title":"It’s Not all or Nothing: Women’s Differential Use of Help-Seeking Strategies in Response to Intimate Partner Violence","authors":"Lynette M. Renner, Carolyn Copps Hartley, Knute D. Carter","doi":"10.1007/s10896-024-00717-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>Although the intimate partner violence (IPV) help-seeking literature has expanded, limited research examines help-seeking patterns utilizing a broad range of strategies. We examined classes of help-seeking strategies using the Intimate Partner Violence Strategy Index, which includes 39 help-seeking strategies in six categories: formal (e.g., stayed in shelter, called a hotline) and informal networks (e.g., talked to family, friends), legal assistance (e.g., called police, filed charges), safety planning behaviors (e.g., hid money or keys), and resistance (e.g., fought back, ended the relationship) and placating (e.g., tried to keep things quiet, avoided him) tactics.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>The sample included 150 women who experienced IPV and sought civil legal services. We used latent class analysis (LCA) to identify strategy use classes and examined differences in class membership by sociodemographics and IPV experiences.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>The LCA identified four classes: High Strategy Use (36% of the sample), Moderate Strategy Use-Resistance Focused (25%), Moderate Strategy Use-Placating Focused (25%), and Low Strategy Use (14%). Women in the High Strategy Use class used an average of 27.35 strategies across all six categories. Women in each Moderate Use class reported high strategy use in one category (i.e., resistance or placating). Women in the Low Strategy Use class used an average of 11.67 strategies with very few safety planning strategies. Class membership was not associated with sociodemographic variables. Women in the High Use Strategy class reported the most frequent and severe IPV.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>Examining help-seeking patterns provides comprehensive views of how women cope with violence and can yield tailored interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Violence","volume":"488 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Violence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-024-00717-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Although the intimate partner violence (IPV) help-seeking literature has expanded, limited research examines help-seeking patterns utilizing a broad range of strategies. We examined classes of help-seeking strategies using the Intimate Partner Violence Strategy Index, which includes 39 help-seeking strategies in six categories: formal (e.g., stayed in shelter, called a hotline) and informal networks (e.g., talked to family, friends), legal assistance (e.g., called police, filed charges), safety planning behaviors (e.g., hid money or keys), and resistance (e.g., fought back, ended the relationship) and placating (e.g., tried to keep things quiet, avoided him) tactics.

Methods

The sample included 150 women who experienced IPV and sought civil legal services. We used latent class analysis (LCA) to identify strategy use classes and examined differences in class membership by sociodemographics and IPV experiences.

Results

The LCA identified four classes: High Strategy Use (36% of the sample), Moderate Strategy Use-Resistance Focused (25%), Moderate Strategy Use-Placating Focused (25%), and Low Strategy Use (14%). Women in the High Strategy Use class used an average of 27.35 strategies across all six categories. Women in each Moderate Use class reported high strategy use in one category (i.e., resistance or placating). Women in the Low Strategy Use class used an average of 11.67 strategies with very few safety planning strategies. Class membership was not associated with sociodemographic variables. Women in the High Use Strategy class reported the most frequent and severe IPV.

Conclusions

Examining help-seeking patterns provides comprehensive views of how women cope with violence and can yield tailored interventions.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
并非全有或全无:妇女在应对亲密伴侣暴力时对求助策略的不同运用
目的 虽然有关亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)求助的文献不断增加,但利用广泛的策略来研究求助模式的研究却很有限。我们使用 "亲密伴侣暴力策略指数"(Intimate Partner Violence Strategy Index)对求助策略的类别进行了研究,该指数包括六大类 39 种求助策略:正式(如入住庇护所、拨打热线电话)和非正式网络(如与家人、朋友交谈)、法律援助(如报警、提出指控)、安全规划行为、方法样本包括 150 名遭受过 IPV 并寻求民事法律服务的女性。我们使用潜类分析(LCA)确定了策略使用类别,并根据社会人口统计学和 IPV 经历研究了类别成员的差异:高度策略使用(占样本的 36%)、中度策略使用-注重反抗(25%)、中度策略使用-注重置换(25%)和低度策略使用(14%)。高策略使用类别中的女性在所有六个类别中平均使用了 27.35 种策略。每个中度策略使用类别中的女性都在一个类别中使用了大量策略(即抵抗或安抚)。低度策略使用类别中的女性平均使用 11.67 种策略,很少使用安全规划策略。该类别的成员资格与社会人口变量无关。结论通过研究寻求帮助的模式,可以全面了解妇女如何应对暴力,并可采取有针对性的干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
10.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: The Journal of Family Violence (JOFV) is a peer-reviewed publication committed to the dissemination of rigorous research on preventing, ending, and ameliorating all forms of family violence.  JOFV welcomes scholarly articles related to the broad categories of child abuse and maltreatment, dating violence, domestic and partner violence, and elder abuse. Within these categories, JOFV emphasizes research on physical violence, psychological violence, sexual violence, and homicides that occur in families. Studies on families in all their various forms and diversities are welcome.  JOFV publishes studies using quantitative, qualitative, and/or mixed methods involving the collection of primary data. Rigorous systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and theoretical analyses are also welcome. To help advance scientific understandings of family violence, JOFV is especially interested in research using transdisciplinary perspectives and innovative research methods. Because family violence is a global problem requiring solutions from diverse disciplinary perspectives, JOFV strongly encourages submissions from scholars worldwide from all disciplines and backgrounds.
期刊最新文献
Religious, Practical and Future-Oriented Coping Strategies to End Intimate Partner Violence: An In-Depth Examination of Ultraorthodox Israeli Women’s Narratives Domestic Violence and Custody Proceedings: An Analysis of Judicial Decisions in Portugal IPV exposure and mental and behavioral health in men during the COVID-19 An Exploratory Study of Safety Scenario Planning Among Ex-Partner Stalking Victims Post-separation Child Contact and Domestic Violence and Abuse: The Experiences of Children with a Disability
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1