How Do People Make Sense of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) in the Context of Perpetrator PTSD Diagnostic Status and Gender Identity?

Abstract

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) has profound effects on victim physical and mental health, considerable social and economic costs and is a significant public health concern. Research suggests that the way the public make sense of IPV may vary in different contexts, as certain contextual factors may be used to explain, excuse or legitimise IPV. PTSD diagnostic status and perpetrator gender may be such contextual factors, but little research exists in this area. Objectives: This study explored how the public make sense of IPV in the context of perpetrator diagnostic status (PTSD or no PTSD) and gender identity (female, male or nonbinary) by exploring IPV ratings and IPV discourses. Methods: Two hundred and sixty-five (265) community participants were recruited via snowball sampling and presented one of six versions of the same story containing an account of IPV. Stories were identical across conditions bar perpetrator diagnostic status and gender identity. Participants rated the degree to which they thought the behaviour in the story constituted IPV. Approximately half the participants also completed a story completion task, and stories were analysed for themes. Results: IPV ratings were weighted towards abuse and did not vary with diagnostic status or gender identity. Five themes were identified in participant stories: (i) characterise the behaviour; (ii) trajectory of IPV; (iii) show compassion towards victim of IPV; (iv) hold victim of IPV responsible; and (v) context influences decision-making. Limitations, implications and directions for future research are discussed.