This study offers a feminist psychology analysis of various aspects of relationship power and control and their relative explanatory contribution to understanding physical, psychological, and sexual violence against women. Findings from structured interviews with 345 women from rural Nicaragua (Mage = 44) overwhelmingly demonstrate that measures of power and control reflecting interpersonal relationship dynamics have the strongest predictive power for explaining violence when compared in multivariate analyses to several of the more commonly used measures. These findings have implications for future research and the evaluation of interventions designed to decrease levels of violence against women.
Acosta-BelénE.BoseC. E. (1990). From structural subordination to empowerment: Women and development in third world contexts. Gender & Society, 4, 299-320.
2.
AgarwalB. (1997). Bargaining and gender relations: Within and beyond the household. Feminist Economics, 3(1), 1-51.
3.
AndersonK. L. (1997). Gender, status and domestic violence: An integration of feminist and family violence approaches. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 655-669.
4.
AndersonK. L. (2005). Theorizing gender in intimate partner violence research. Sex Roles, 52, 853-865.
5.
AndersonK. L.UmbersonD. (2001). Gendering violence: Masculinity and power in men’s accounts of domestic violence. Gender & Society, 15, 358-380.
6.
AtkinsonM. P.GreensteinT. N.LangM. M. (2005). For women, breadwinning can be dangerous: Gendered resource theory and wife abuse. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 1137-1148.
7.
BabcockJ. C.WaltzJ.JacobsonN. S.GottmanJ. M. (1993). Power and violence: The relation between communication patterns, power discrepancies, and domestic violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 40-50.
8.
BeadnellB.BakerS. A.MorrisonD. M.KnoxK. (2000). HIV/STD risk factors for women with violent male partners. Sex Roles, 42, 661-689.
9.
BlancA. K. (2001). The effect of power in sexual relationships on sexual and reproductive health: An examination of the evidence. Studies in Family Planning, 32, 189-213.
10.
CastroR.CasiqueI.BrindisC. D. (2008). Empowerment and physical violence throughout women’s reproductive life in Mexico. Violence Against Women, 14, 655-677.
11.
ColemanD. H.StrausM. A. (1986). Marital power, conflict, and violence in a nationally representative sample of American couples. Violence and Victims, 1, 141-157.
12.
ConnellR. (1987). Gender and power: The society, the person, and sexual politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
13.
DunkleK. L.JewkesR. K.BrownH. C.GrayG. E.McIntryreJ. A.HarlowS. D. (2004). Gender-based violence, relationship power, and risk of HIV infection in women attending antenatal clinics in South Africa. The Lancet, 363, 1415-1421.
14.
DworkinS. L.ColvinC.HatcherA.PeacockD. (2012). Men’s perceptions of women’s rights and changing gender relations in South Africa: Lessons from working with men and boys in HIV and antiviolence programs. Gender & Society, 26, 97-120.
15.
DworkinS. L.DunbarM. S.KrishnanS.HatcherA. M.SawiresS. (2011). Uncovering tensions and capitalizing on synergies in HIV/AIDS and antiviolence programs. American Journal of Public Health, 101, 995-1003.
16.
EllsbergM.HeiseL. (2005). Researching violence against women: A practical guide for researchers and activists. Washington, DC: World Health Organization, Program for Appropriate Technology in Health.
17.
EllsbergM.HeiseL.PeñaR.AgurtoS.WinkvistA. (2001). Researching domestic violence against women: Methodological and ethical considerations. Studies in Family Planning, 32, 1-16.
18.
EllsbergM.PeñaR.HerreraA.LiljestrandJ.WinkvistA. (2000). Candies in hell: Women’s experiences of violence in Nicaragua. Social Science & Medicine, 51, 1595-1610.
19.
Else-QuestN. M.GrabeS. (2012). The political is personal: Measurement and application of nation-level indicators of gender equity in psychological research. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 131-144.
20.
FineM. (1989). The politics of research and activism: Violence against women. Gender & Society, 3, 549-558.
21.
FlakeD. F. (2005). Individual, family, and community risk factors for domestic violence in Peru. Violence Against Women, 11, 353-373.
22.
FregosoR.-L.BejaranoC. (Eds.). (2010). Terrorizing women: Feminicide in the Américas. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
23.
FriezeI. H.McHughM. C. (1992). Power and influence strategies in violent and nonviolent marriages. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 449-465.
24.
GageA. J.HutchinsonP. L. (2006). Power, control, and intimate partner sexual violence in Haiti. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 11-24.
25.
GrabeS. (2010). Promoting gender equality: The role of ideology, power and control in the link between land ownership and violence in Nicaragua. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 10, 146-170.
26.
GriscomJ. L. (1992). Women and power. Definition, dualism, and difference. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 389-414.
27.
HaywardC. R. (1998). De-facing power. Polity, 31, 1-22.
28.
HeiseL. (1998). Violence against women: An integrated, ecological framework. Violence Against Women, 4, 262-290.
29.
HurtadoA. (2009). Multiple lenses: Multicultural feminist theory. In LandrineH.RussoN. (Eds.), Handbook of diversity in feminist psychology (pp. 29-55). New York: Springer.
30.
International Center for Research on Women. (2006). Property ownership and inheritance rights of women for social protection: The South Asia experience. Washington, DC: Author.
31.
JejeebhoyS. J. (1998). Wife-beating in rural India: A husband’s right?Economic & Political Weekly, 33, 855-862.
32.
JewkesR. K.DunkleK.NdunaM.ShaiN. (2010). Intimate partner violence, relationship power inequity, and incidence of HIV infection in young women in South Africa: A cohort study. The Lancet, 376, 41-48.
33.
KabeerN. (1999). Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Development and Change, 30, 435-464.
34.
KampwirthK. (2008). Abortion, antifeminism, and the return of Daniel Ortega: In Nicaragua, leftist politics?Latin American Perspectives, 168, 122-136.
35.
KauraS. A.AllenC. M. (2004). Dissatisfaction with relationship power and dating violence perpetration by men and women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 576-588.
36.
Lagardeyde los RíosM. (2010). Preface: Feminist keys for understanding feminicide: Theoretical, political, and legal construction. In FregosoR.-L.BejaranoC. (Eds.), Terrorizing women: Feminicide in the Américas (pp. xi-xxv). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
37.
MalikN. M.LindahlK. M. (1998). Aggression and dominance: The roles of power and culture in domestic violence. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 5, 409-423.
38.
McCloskyL. A. (1996). Socio-economic and coercive power within the family. Gender & Society, 10, 449-463.
39.
MillerC. L.CumminsA. G. (1992). An examination of women’s perspectives on power. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 415-428.
40.
MoaneG. (2011). Gender and colonialism: A psychological analysis of oppression and liberation. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
41.
MolyneuxM. (2001). Women’s movements in international perspective: Latin America and beyond (2nd ed.). London, England: University of London.
42.
MosedaleS. (2005). Assessing women’s empowerment: Towards a conceptual framework. Journal of International Development, 17, 243-257.
43.
PandaP.AgarwalB. (2005). Marital violence, human development, and women’s property status in India. World Development, 33, 823-850.
44.
PenceE.PaymarM. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth Model. New York: Springer.
45.
PrilleltenskyI. (2008). The role of power in wellness, oppression, and liberation: The promise of psychopolitical validity. Journal of Community Psychology, 36, 116-136.
46.
PulerwitzJ.GortmakerS. L.DeJongW. (2000). Measuring sexual relationship power in HIV/STD research. Sex Roles, 42, 637-660.
47.
RonfeldtH. M.KimerlingR.AriasI. (1998). Satisfaction with relationship power and the perpetration of dating violence. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 70-78.
48.
SchulerS. R.HashemiS. M.BadalS. H. (1998). Men’s violence against women in rural Bangladesh: Undermined or exacerbated by microcredit programmes?Development in Practice, 8, 148-157.
49.
SchulerS. R.HashemiS. M.RileyA. P.AkhterS. (1996). Credit programs, patriarchy and men’s violence against women in rural Bangladesh. Social Science & Medicine, 43, 1729-1742.
50.
SternbergP. (2000). Challenging machismo: Promoting sexual and reproductive health with Nicaraguan men. Gender & Development, 8, 89-99.
51.
StrausM. A.HambyS. L.Boney-McCoyS.SugarmanD. B. (1996). The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316.
United Nations. (1995). Beijing declaration and platform for action. Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, China. New York: United Nations Department of Public Information.Retrieved from http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/pdf/BDPfA%20E.pdf
WattsC.HeiseL.EllsbergM.MorenoC. G. (2001). Putting women first: Ethical and safety recommendations for research on domestic violence against women. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Retrieved from www.who.int/gender/violence/womenfirtseng.pdf
57.
WingoodG. M.DiClementeR. J. (2000). Application of the theory of gender and power to examine HIV-related exposures, risk factors, and effective interventions for women. Health Education & Behavior, 27, 539-565.
58.
World Health Organization. (2005). WHO Multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence against women: Summary report of initial results on prevalence, health outcomes and women’s responses. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
59.
YllöK. A. (1993). Through a feminist lens: Gender, power, and violence. In GellesR. J.LosekeD. R. (Eds.), Current controversies on family violence (pp. 47-66). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
60.
YoderJ. D.KahnA. S. (1992). Toward a feminist understanding of women and power. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 381-388.
