如何评估亲密伴侣暴力报告?在男性被指控实施亲密伴侣暴力的异性伴侣法医样本中考察伴侣间的协议。

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Interpersonal Violence Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-10 DOI:10.1177/08862605241249740
Marta Capinha, Daniel Rijo, Marlene Matos, Marco Pereira
{"title":"如何评估亲密伴侣暴力报告?在男性被指控实施亲密伴侣暴力的异性伴侣法医样本中考察伴侣间的协议。","authors":"Marta Capinha, Daniel Rijo, Marlene Matos, Marco Pereira","doi":"10.1177/08862605241249740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research about interpartner agreement on intimate partner violence (IPV) is mainly based on community and clinical samples, with forensic or court-related samples being overlooked. This study assesses interpartner agreement on IPV reports based on the Revised Conflict Tactic Scales, aiming to explore if the proxy method would be reliable in a court-related setting. The study sample comprised 62 different-sex couples identified in the Portuguese judicial system due to an IPV-related crime perpetrated by men. Agreement was assessed based on different indexes: percent agreement and Gwet's AC1 for occurrence, and Tau-b and intraclass correlations for frequency. Men's and women's perpetration were considered. Results showed that interpartner agreement on IPV occurrence (ranging from poor-to-very good) tended to be higher and more consistent among indexes than agreement on IPV frequency (ranging from non-existent to strong). This study highlights the need to collect both partners' reports in court-related settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":16289,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","volume":" ","pages":"537-563"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11673307/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to Evaluate Reports of Intimate Partner Violence? Examining Interpartner Agreement in a Forensic Sample of Different-Sex Couples Where Men are Accused of Intimate Partner Violence.\",\"authors\":\"Marta Capinha, Daniel Rijo, Marlene Matos, Marco Pereira\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08862605241249740\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Research about interpartner agreement on intimate partner violence (IPV) is mainly based on community and clinical samples, with forensic or court-related samples being overlooked. This study assesses interpartner agreement on IPV reports based on the Revised Conflict Tactic Scales, aiming to explore if the proxy method would be reliable in a court-related setting. The study sample comprised 62 different-sex couples identified in the Portuguese judicial system due to an IPV-related crime perpetrated by men. Agreement was assessed based on different indexes: percent agreement and Gwet's AC1 for occurrence, and Tau-b and intraclass correlations for frequency. Men's and women's perpetration were considered. Results showed that interpartner agreement on IPV occurrence (ranging from poor-to-very good) tended to be higher and more consistent among indexes than agreement on IPV frequency (ranging from non-existent to strong). This study highlights the need to collect both partners' reports in court-related settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interpersonal Violence\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"537-563\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11673307/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interpersonal Violence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241249740\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241249740","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有关亲密伴侣间暴力(IPV)的伴侣间协议的研究主要基于社区和临床样本,而忽略了法医或法庭相关样本。本研究以修订版冲突策略量表为基础,对伴侣间就 IPV 报告达成的一致意见进行评估,旨在探讨这种代理方法在法庭相关环境中是否可靠。研究样本由葡萄牙司法系统中因男性实施的 IPV 相关犯罪而确认的 62 对不同性别的夫妇组成。一致性根据不同的指标进行评估:发生率的一致性百分比和 Gwet's AC1,频率的 Tau-b 和类内相关性。研究考虑了男性和女性的犯罪情况。结果显示,伴侣间就 IPV 发生率(从较差到非常好)达成的一致意见往往高于就 IPV 发生频率(从不曾有过到很好)达成的一致意见,且各指标之间的一致性更高。本研究强调了在法庭相关环境中收集伴侣双方报告的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How to Evaluate Reports of Intimate Partner Violence? Examining Interpartner Agreement in a Forensic Sample of Different-Sex Couples Where Men are Accused of Intimate Partner Violence.

Research about interpartner agreement on intimate partner violence (IPV) is mainly based on community and clinical samples, with forensic or court-related samples being overlooked. This study assesses interpartner agreement on IPV reports based on the Revised Conflict Tactic Scales, aiming to explore if the proxy method would be reliable in a court-related setting. The study sample comprised 62 different-sex couples identified in the Portuguese judicial system due to an IPV-related crime perpetrated by men. Agreement was assessed based on different indexes: percent agreement and Gwet's AC1 for occurrence, and Tau-b and intraclass correlations for frequency. Men's and women's perpetration were considered. Results showed that interpartner agreement on IPV occurrence (ranging from poor-to-very good) tended to be higher and more consistent among indexes than agreement on IPV frequency (ranging from non-existent to strong). This study highlights the need to collect both partners' reports in court-related settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
12.00%
发文量
375
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interpersonal Violence is devoted to the study and treatment of victims and perpetrators of interpersonal violence. It provides a forum of discussion of the concerns and activities of professionals and researchers working in domestic violence, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual assault, physical child abuse, and violent crime. With its dual focus on victims and victimizers, the journal will publish material that addresses the causes, effects, treatment, and prevention of all types of violence. JIV only publishes reports on individual studies in which the scientific method is applied to the study of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Research may use qualitative or quantitative methods. JIV does not publish reviews of research, individual case studies, or the conceptual analysis of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Outcome data for program or intervention evaluations must include a comparison or control group.
期刊最新文献
How to Evaluate Reports of Intimate Partner Violence? Examining Interpartner Agreement in a Forensic Sample of Different-Sex Couples Where Men are Accused of Intimate Partner Violence. Intimate Partner Violence and Attachment Styles as Factors Associated with Coping Stress Styles Among Iranian Women. Investigating the Impact of Reproductive Coercion and Intimate Partner Violence on Psychological and Sexual Wellbeing. Universal Sexual Violence Intervention Effects in a Cluster-Randomized Trial: Moderation by Sexual Orientation. Institutional Betrayal in the Criminal and Civil Legal Systems: Exploratory Factor Analysis with a Sample of Black and Hispanic Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence.
×
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