欧盟的地位不匹配和自我报告的亲密伴侣暴力:国家背景重要吗?

IF 2.3 1区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY European Societies Pub Date : 2022-05-06 DOI:10.1080/14616696.2022.2068184
Lynn van Vugt, I. Pop
{"title":"欧盟的地位不匹配和自我报告的亲密伴侣暴力:国家背景重要吗?","authors":"Lynn van Vugt, I. Pop","doi":"10.1080/14616696.2022.2068184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We explore whether status mismatch in education or income within couples is associated with self-reported intimate partner violence (IPV) and whether a country’s context relates to this. We used data collected by the ‘FRA Violence Against Women Survey’ in 2012, and we identified three dimensions of self-reported IPV: IPV via controlling behaviour, psychological IPV, and physical IPV. Based on logistic multilevel estimates of approximately 21,000 women in 27 European countries, we found that women, who were higher educated or earned more than their partners, were more likely to report all three types of IPV. We tested the impact of the societal context by looking at gender ideology, crime rates and the acceptance of domestic violence within a country. Our results suggest that only the level of crime directly impacts IPV, albeit only through controlling behaviour and psychological forms. Furthermore, none of the contextual characteristics moderate the relationship between status mismatch and IPV. Therefore, at least in our sample of European countries, the individual-level factors seem to weigh more than the societal context.","PeriodicalId":47392,"journal":{"name":"European Societies","volume":"92 1","pages":"283 - 309"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Status mismatch and self-reported intimate partner violence in the European Union: does the country’s context matter?\",\"authors\":\"Lynn van Vugt, I. Pop\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14616696.2022.2068184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT We explore whether status mismatch in education or income within couples is associated with self-reported intimate partner violence (IPV) and whether a country’s context relates to this. We used data collected by the ‘FRA Violence Against Women Survey’ in 2012, and we identified three dimensions of self-reported IPV: IPV via controlling behaviour, psychological IPV, and physical IPV. Based on logistic multilevel estimates of approximately 21,000 women in 27 European countries, we found that women, who were higher educated or earned more than their partners, were more likely to report all three types of IPV. We tested the impact of the societal context by looking at gender ideology, crime rates and the acceptance of domestic violence within a country. Our results suggest that only the level of crime directly impacts IPV, albeit only through controlling behaviour and psychological forms. Furthermore, none of the contextual characteristics moderate the relationship between status mismatch and IPV. Therefore, at least in our sample of European countries, the individual-level factors seem to weigh more than the societal context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Societies\",\"volume\":\"92 1\",\"pages\":\"283 - 309\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Societies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2022.2068184\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Societies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2022.2068184","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:我们探讨夫妻中教育或收入的地位不匹配是否与自我报告的亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)有关,以及一个国家的背景是否与此有关。我们使用了2012年“FRA暴力侵害妇女调查”收集的数据,确定了自我报告的IPV的三个维度:通过控制行为的IPV,心理IPV和身体IPV。基于对27个欧洲国家约21,000名女性的logistic多水平估计,我们发现,受教育程度较高或收入高于其伴侣的女性更有可能报告所有三种类型的IPV。我们通过观察一个国家的性别意识形态、犯罪率和对家庭暴力的接受程度来测试社会背景的影响。我们的研究结果表明,只有犯罪水平直接影响IPV,尽管只是通过控制行为和心理形式。此外,语境特征没有调节地位错配与IPV之间的关系。因此,至少在我们的欧洲国家样本中,个人层面的因素似乎比社会背景更重要。
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
Status mismatch and self-reported intimate partner violence in the European Union: does the country’s context matter?
ABSTRACT We explore whether status mismatch in education or income within couples is associated with self-reported intimate partner violence (IPV) and whether a country’s context relates to this. We used data collected by the ‘FRA Violence Against Women Survey’ in 2012, and we identified three dimensions of self-reported IPV: IPV via controlling behaviour, psychological IPV, and physical IPV. Based on logistic multilevel estimates of approximately 21,000 women in 27 European countries, we found that women, who were higher educated or earned more than their partners, were more likely to report all three types of IPV. We tested the impact of the societal context by looking at gender ideology, crime rates and the acceptance of domestic violence within a country. Our results suggest that only the level of crime directly impacts IPV, albeit only through controlling behaviour and psychological forms. Furthermore, none of the contextual characteristics moderate the relationship between status mismatch and IPV. Therefore, at least in our sample of European countries, the individual-level factors seem to weigh more than the societal context.
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
European Societies
European Societies SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
1.20%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: European Societies, the flagship journal of the European Sociological Association, aims to promote and share sociological research related to Europe. As a generalist sociology journal, we welcome research from all areas of sociology. However, we have a specific focus on addressing the socio-economic and socio-political challenges faced by European societies, as well as exploring all aspects of European social life and socioculture. Our journal is committed to upholding ethical standards and academic independence. We conduct a rigorous and anonymous review process for all submitted manuscripts. This ensures the quality and integrity of the research we publish. European Societies encourages a plurality of perspectives within the sociology discipline. We embrace a wide range of sociological methods and theoretical approaches. Furthermore, we are open to articles that adopt a historical perspective and engage in comparative research involving Europe as a whole or specific European countries. We also appreciate comparative studies that include societies beyond Europe. In summary, European Societies is dedicated to promoting sociological research with a focus on European societies. We welcome diverse methodological and theoretical approaches, historical perspectives, and comparative studies involving Europe and other societies.
期刊最新文献
Settling into uncertainty and risk amidst the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine Gender compositions of occupations and firms jointly shape switches from gender-atypical towards more gender-typical positions The effect of the month of birth on academic achievement: heterogeneity by social origin and gender Do they think that joy and misery are temporary? Comparing trajectories of current and predicted life satisfaction across life events Narrowing inequalities through redistribution. A relational inequality approach to female managers and the gender wage gap
×
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