000			03682nab a22004097a 4500
999			_c8086 _d8086
005			20250625151634.0
008			230412s2023 -nz|| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_91129 _aFanslow, Janet L.
245			_aEvidence of gender asymmetry in intimate partner violence experience at the population-level _cJanet Fanslow, Brooklyn M. Mellar, Pauline Gulliver and Tracey McIntosh
260			_bSage, _c2023
500			_aJournal of Interpersonal Violence, 2023, First published online, 9 April 2023
520			_aClaims of “gender symmetry” in intimate partner violence (IPV) prevalence are contested, with resolution of the issue complicated by methodological and measurement challenges. This study explores gendered differences in the distribution of IPV exposure at the population-level, considering multiple types of IPV exposure. The subjects comprised of 1,431 ever-partnered women and 1,355 ever-partnered men. Data from a nationally representative population-based cross-sectional survey were used to compare men and women’s IPV experiences. Twenty-three IPV acts were assessed across IPV types (moderate physical, severe physical, sexual, psychological, controlling behaviors, economic). Proportions were presented by gender for the number of individual IPV acts experienced per IPV type, and the frequency of these acts (none, once, few times, or many times). A composite exposure score was developed to assess the number of acts and their frequency within types by comparing scores in tertiles and across types by correlations. Women reported greater overall prevalence of 20 of the 23 individual IPV acts assessed. Across all assessed acts, women comprised a substantially greater proportion of those who reported experiencing individual acts “many times.” Women experienced more severe and more frequent IPV than men based on self-reported experience of IPV acts, and by the frequency with which acts were experienced. Significant differences between men and women’s exposure scores were observed for all six assessed types, with greater proportions of women scoring in the upper tertiles. This study provides evidence of gender asymmetry in experiences of IPV at the population level. While men do experience IPV victimization, there remains need for directed and substantial resource allocation for intervention and therapeutic responses to women’s exposure to IPV, and for primary prevention with men. Going forward, IPV measurement tools that consider frequency, severity, or co-occurring types of IPV are needed. (Authors' abstract). Record #8086
650			_aABUSED WOMEN _925
650			_aABUSED MEN _924
650			_aCOERCIVE CONTROL _95771
650			_aDOMESTIC VIOLENCE _9203
650			_aECONOMIC ABUSE _93432
650		0	_aGENDER SYMMETRY DEBATE _96447
650			_aINTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE _9431
650		4	_aPHYSICAL ABUSE _9439
650			_aPREVALENCE _9457
650		4	_aPSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE _9472
650		4	_aSEXUAL VIOLENCE _9531
650			_aSURVEYS _9592
650		4	_aVICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE _9624
650		0	_aVICTIMS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE _96716
650		0	_a2019 NZ Family Violence Study | He Koiora Matapopore _99837
651		4	_aNEW ZEALAND _92588
700			_aMellar, Brooklyn M. _911655
700			_92705 _aGulliver, Pauline
700			_aMcIntosh, Tracey. _92985
773	0		_tJournal of Interpersonal Violence, 2023, First published online, 9 April 2023
830			_aJournal of Interpersonal Violence _94621
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231163646 _zDOI: 10.1177/08862605231163646 (Open access)
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE _hnews119