Assessing progress toward Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5, to achieve gender equality and to empower women, requires monitoring trends in intimate partner violence (IPV). Current measures of IPV may miss women’s experiences of economic coercion, or interference with the acquisition, use, and maintenance of financial resources. This sequential, mixed-methods study developed and validated a scale for economic coercion in married women in rural Bangladesh, where women’s expanding economic opportunities may elevate the risks of economic coercion and other IPV. Forty items capturing lifetime and prior-year economic coercion were adapted from formative qualitative research and prior scales and administered to a probability sample of 930 married women 16–49 years. An economic coercion scale (ECS) was validated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with primary data from random-split samples (N1 = 310; N2 = 620). Item response theory (IRT) methods gauged the measurement precision of items and scales over the range of the economic-coercion latent trait. Multiple-group factor analysis assessed measurement invariance of the economic-coercion construct. Two-thirds (62.26%) of women reported any lifetime economic coercion. EFA suggested a 36-item, two-factor model capturing barriers to acquire and to use or maintain economic resources. CFA, multiple group factor analysis, and multidimensional IRT methods confirmed that this model provided a reasonable fit to the data. IRT analysis showed that each dimension provided most precision over the higher range of the economic coercion trait. The Economic Coercion Scale 36 (ECS-36) should be validated elsewhere and over time. It may be added to violence-specific surveys and evaluations of violence-prevention and economic-empowerment programs that have a primary interest measuring economic coercion. Short-form versions of the ECS may be developed for multipurpose surveys and program monitoring.
AdamsA. E.GreesonM. R.LittwinA. K.JavorkaM. (2020). The Revised Scale of Economic Abuse (SEA2): Development and initial psychometric testing of an updated measure of economic abuse in intimate relationships. Psychology of Violence, 10(3), 268–278.
2.
AdamsA. E.SullivanC. M.BybeeD.GreesonM. R. (2008). Development of the scale of economic abuse. Violence against Women, 14(5), 563–588.
3.
Al-ZayedS. R.TalukdarF.JahanF.AsaduzzamanT.ShamsF. (2018). Beyond gender parity: Actualization of benefits verses fallacy of promises. The World Bank Group.
4.
AminS.DiamondI.NavedR.T.NewbyM. (1998). Transition to adulthood of female garment-factory workers in Bangladesh. Studies in Family Planning, 29(22), 185–200.
5.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. (2013). Report on violence against women survey 2011.
6.
BlackM. C.BasileK. C.BreidingM. J.SmithS. G.WaltersM. L.MerrickM. T.ChenJ.StevensM. R. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 summary report. US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
7.
BrownT. A. (2014). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
8.
BrushL. D. (2002). Work-related abuse: A replication, new items, and persistent questions. Violence and Victims, 17(6), 743–757.
9.
ChenF. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504.
10.
ChenW.-H.ThissenD. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22(3), 265–289.
11.
CheongY. F.YountK. M.CrandallA. A. (2017). Longitudinal measurement invariance of the women’s agency scale. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique [Bulletin of Sociological Methodology], 134(1), 24–36.
12.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indices for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.
13.
CookS.ParrottD. (2009). Exploring a taxonomy for aggression against women: Can it aid conceptual clarity?Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 35(6), 462–476.
14.
CrinsM. H. P.van der WeesP. J.KlauschT.van DulmenS. A.RoordaL. D.TerweeC. B. (2018). Psychometric properties of the PROMIS Physical Function item bank in patients receiving physical therapy. PLOS One, 13(2), e0192187–e0192187.
15.
DavilaA. L.JohnsonL.PostmusJ. L. (2017). Examining the relationship between economic abuse and mental health among Latina intimate partner violence survivors in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(1–2), NP287–NP310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517731311
16.
DevriesK. M.MakJ. Y. T.Garcia-MorenoC.PetzoldM.ChildJ. C.FalderG.LimS.BacchusL. J.EngellR. E.RosenfeldL.PallittoC.VosT.AbrahamN.WattsC. H. (2013). The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science, 340(6140), 1527–1528.
17.
DuttonM. A.GoodmanL. A. (2005). Coercion in intimate partner violence: Toward a new conceptualization. Sex Roles, 52, 743–756.
18.
ElghossainT.BottS.AkikC.ObermeyerC. M. (2019). Prevalence of intimate partner violence against women in the Arab world: A systematic review. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 19(1), 29.
19.
FawoleO. I. (2008). Economic violence to women and girls: Is it receiving the necessary attention?Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 9(3), 167–177.
20.
GalvezG.MankowskiE. S.McGladeM. S.RuizM. E.GlassN. (2011). Work-related intimate partner violence among employed immigrants from Mexico. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12(3), 230.
21.
GibbsA.DunkleK.JewkesR. (2018). Emotional and economic intimate partner violence as key drivers of depression and suicidal ideation: A cross-sectional study among young women in informal settlements in South Africa. PLOS One, 13(4), e0194885.
22.
GoetzA. M.GuptaR. S. (1996). Who takes the credit? Gender, power, and control over loan use in rural credit programs in Bangladesh. World Development, 24(1), 45–63.
23.
GonzalezF. R.BenutoL. T.CasasJ. B. (2020). Prevalence of interpersonal violence among Latinas: A systematic review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 21(5), 977–990.
24.
HarringtonD. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford University Press.
25.
HeathR. (2014). Women’s access to labor market opportunities, control of household resources, and domestic violence: Evidence from Bangladesh. World Development, 57, 32–46.
26.
International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b). (2016). Health and Demographic Surveillance System-Matlab, v. 48. Household Socio-economic Census 2014.
27.
International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b). (2018). Health and Demographic Surveillance System-Matlab, v. 51. Registration of Health and Demographic Events 2016.
28.
KabeerN. (2011). Between affiliation and autonomy: Navigating pathways of women’s empowerment and gender justice in rural Bangladesh. Development and Change, 42, 499–528.
29.
KandiyotiD. (1988). Bargaining with patriarchy. Gender & Society, 2(3), 274–290.
30.
KarimK. R.LawC. K. (2016). Gendered ideology, male dominance and women’s microcredit participation in rural Bangladesh. In ConnerleyM. L.WuJ. (Eds.), Handbook on well-being of working women (pp. 755–768). Springer.
31.
KhanZ.CheongY. F.MiedemaS. S.NavedR. T.YountK. M. (2020). Women’s experiences of economic coercion and depressive symptoms in Matlab, Bangladesh. SSM-population health, 12, 100641.
32.
LehmannP.SimmonsC. A.PillaiV. K. (2012). Validation of the Checklist of Controlling Behaviors (CCB) assessing coercive control in abusive relationships. Violence Against Women, 18(8), 913–933.
33.
LittwinA. (2012a). Coerced debt: The role of consumer credit in domestic violence. California Law Review, 100, 951.
34.
LittwinA. (2012b). Escaping battered credit: A proposal for repairing credit reports damaged by domestic violence. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 161, 363.
35.
MahmudS.TasneemS. (2011). The under reporting of women’s economic activity in Bangladesh: An examination of official statistics(BDI Working Paper No. 01). BRAC Development Institute, BRAC University.
36.
Maydeu-OlivaresA. (2015). Evaluating fit in IRT models. In ReiseS. P.RevickiD. A. (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory modeling: Applications to typical performance assessment (pp. 111–127). Routledge.
MiedemaS. S.HenninkM. M.TalokarA.NavedR.T.DoreE.YountK. M.. (n.d.). Women’s income-generating activity and experiences of economic coercion in rural Bangladesh. (unpublished manuscript).
39.
MoonM. (2019). Status of female labour force participation in Bangladesh: Trend and factors. World Applied Sciences Journal, 37(5), 361–367.
40.
MorizotJ.AinsworthA. T.ReiseS. P. (2009). Toward modern psychometrics: Application of item response theory models in personality research. In RobinsR. W.FraleyR. C.KruegerR. F. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 407–423). The Guilford Press.
41.
MulunehM. D.StulzV.FrancisL.AghoK. (2020). Gender based violence against women in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3), 903.
42.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998–2018). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Muthén and Muthén.
43.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(4), 599–620.
44.
MyersN. D.AhnS.JinY. (2011). Sample size and power estimates for a confirmatory factor analytic model in exercise and sport: A Monte Carlo approach. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(3), 412–423.
45.
National Institute of Population Research and Training. (2007). Bangladesh demographic and health survey. National Institute of Population Research and Training, Mitra and Associates, Macro International.
46.
NavedR.T.HuqueH.FarahS.ShuvraM.M.R. (2011). Men’s attitudes and practices regarding gender and violence against women in Bangladesh. icddr,b special publication no. 135. Dhaka, Bangladesh: icddr,b; UNFPA; Partners for Prevention; The Change Project.
47.
PostmusJ. L.HogeG. L.BreckenridgeJ.Sharp-JeffsN.ChungD. (2020). Economic abuse as an invisible form of domestic violence: A multicountry review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 21(2), 261–283.
48.
PostmusJ. L.HuangC.-C.Mathisen-StylianouA. (2012). The impact of physical and economic abuse on maternal mental health and parenting. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(9), 1922–1928.
49.
PostmusJ. L.PlummerS.-B.McMahonS.MurshidN. S.KimM. S. (2012). Understanding economic abuse in the lives of survivors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(3), 411–430.
50.
PostmusJ. L.PlummerS.-B.StylianouA. M. (2016). Measuring economic abuse in the lives of survivors: Revising the scale of economic abuse. Violence Against Women, 22(6), 692–703.
51.
ReckaseM. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory models. Springer.
52.
RigerS.AhrensC.BlickenstaffA. (2015). Measuring interference with employment and education reported by women with abusive partners: Preliminary data. Perspectives on Verbal and Psychological Abuse, 15(2), 89.
53.
SalemR.CheongY. F.YountK. M. (2018). Is women’s work a pathway to their agency in rural Minya, Egypt?Social Indicators Research, 136(2), 807–831.
54.
StarkE. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford University Press.
55.
StylianouA. M.PostmusJ. L.McMahonS. (2013). Measuring abusive behaviors: Is economic abuse a unique form of abuse?Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(16), 3186–3204.
56.
TolandM. D. (2014). Practical guide to conducting an item response theory analysis. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 34(1), 120–151.
57.
WeaverT. L.SandersC. K.CampbellC. L.SchnabelM. (2009). Development and preliminary psychometric evaluation of the domestic violence—related financial issues scale (DV-FI). Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(4), 569–585.
58.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2001a). Putting women first: Ethical and safety recommendations for research on domestic violence against women.
59.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2001b). Multicountry study on women’s health and domestic violence study protocol, Doc. WHO/EIP/GPE/99.3.
60.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2010). Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: Taking action and generating evidence.
61.
YountK. M.KrauseK. H.VanderEndeK. E. (2016). Economic coercion and partner violence against wives in Vietnam: a unified framework?Journal of interpersonal violence, 31(20), 3307–3331.
62.
YountK. M.DiGirolamoA. M.RamakrishnanU. (2011). Impacts of domestic violence on child growth and nutrition: a conceptual review of the pathways of influence. Social science & medicine, 72(9), 1534–1554.
63.
YountK. M.HalimN.SchulerS. R.HeadS. (2013). A survey experiment of women’s attitudes about intimate partner violence against women in rural Bangladesh. Demography, 50(1), 333–357.
