Feminist scholars have argued that husband gender traditionalism is one of the root causes of spousal violence against women. Using couple-level data from Hong Kong (N = 871 couples), this article argues that a second mechanism—couple gender value mismatch—also explains husband-to-wife physical assault. Our findings show that a husband’s gender traditionalism is positively associated with husband-to-wife physical assault only when the husband is coupled with a wife who has non-traditional gender attitudes. Similarly, egalitarian gender attitudes in wives are positively associated with husband-to-wife physical assault only when a non-traditional wife is coupled with a traditional husband.
AliP. A.NaylorP. B. (2013). Intimate partner violence: A narrative review of the feminist, social and ecological explanations for its causation. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18, 611-619. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2013.07.009
2.
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. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00206.x
3.
BolzendahlC. I.MyersD. J. (2004). Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men, 1974-1998. Social Forces, 83, 759-789. doi:10.1353/sof.2005.0005
4.
BrewsterK. L.PadavicI. (2000). Change in gender-ideology, 1977-1996: The contributions of intracohort change and population turnover. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 477-487. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00477.x
5.
BroadhurstR.BouhoursB.Bacon-ShoneJ. (2012). Hong Kong, the International Violence Against Women Survey: Final report of the 2006 Hong Kong IVAWS. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2076994
6.
ChanH. M.LeeR. (1995). Hong Kong families: At the crossroads of modernism and traditionalism. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 26, 83-99.
7.
ChanK. L. (2004). Correlates of wife assault in Hong Kong Chinese families. Violence and Victims, 19, 189-201.
8.
ChanK. L. (2005). Study on child abuse and spouse battering: Report on findings of household survey. Pok Fu Lam: University of Hong Kong.
9.
ChanK. L.BrownridgeD. A.TiwariA.FongD. Y.LeungW.-C. (2008). Understanding violence against Chinese women in Hong Kong: An analysis of risk factors with a special emphasis on the role of in-law conflict. Violence Against Women, 14, 1295-1312.
10.
CheungA. K. L.ChoiS. Y. P. (2013). Economic insecurity and husband-to-wife physical assault in Hong Kong: The role of husband’s power motive. In YeungW. J. J.YapM. T. (Eds.), Economic stress, human capital, and families in Asia (pp. 105-127). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
11.
ChoiS. Y. P.AuW. T.WongW.LiongC. C. M.WongF. Y.LoS. K. W.ChaoK. C. (2012). Research report: Exploratory study on gender stereotyping and its impacts on male gender. Hong Kong: Equal Opportunities Commission.
12.
ChoiS. Y. P.CheungF. M. C. (Eds.). (2012). Women and girls in Hong Kong: Current situations and future challenges. Shatin: Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies.
13.
ChoiS. Y. P.CheungY. W.CheungA. K. L. (2012). Social isolation and spousal violence: Comparing female marriage migrants with local women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74, 444-461. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00963.x
14.
ChowN.LumT. (2008). Trends in family attitudes and values in Hong Kong. Pok Fu Lam: University of Hong Kong.
15.
CorrigallE. A.KonradA. M. (2007). Gender role attitudes and careers: A longitudinal study. Sex Roles, 56, 847-855. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9242-0
16.
CubbinsL. A.VannoyD. (2005). Socioeconomic resources, gender traditionalism, and wife abuse in urban Russian couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 37-52.
17.
DavisS. N.GreensteinT. N. (2009). Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 87-105.
18.
DeMarisA.BensonM. L.FoxG. L.HillT.Van WykJ. (2003). Distal and proximal factors in domestic violence: A test of an integrated model. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 652-667. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00652.x
19.
DobashR. E.DobashR. (1979). Violence against wives: A case against the patriarchy. New York: Free Press.
20.
DuttonD. G. (1994). Patriarchy and wife assault: The ecological fallacy. Violence and Victims, 9, 167-182.
21.
EnglandP. (2010). The gender revolution uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24, 149-166.
22.
FirestoneJ. M.HarrisR. J.VegaW. A. (2003). The impact of gender role ideology, male expectancies, and acculturation on wife abuse. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 549-564. doi:10.1016/S0160-2527(03)00086-4
23.
FlynnA.GrahamK. (2010). “Why did it happen?” A review and conceptual framework for research on perpetrators’ and victims’ explanations for intimate partner violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 239-251. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2010.01.002
24.
FungA.MaE. (2000). Formal vs. informal use of television and sex-stereotyping in Hong Kong. Sex Roles, 42, 57-81.
25.
García-MorenoC.JansenH.EllsbergM.HeiseL.WattsC. (2005). WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence against women. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
26.
GreensteinT. N. (1996). Husbands’ participation in domestic labor: Interactive effects of wives’ and husbands’ gender ideologies. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58, 585-595. doi:10.2307/353719
27.
HarrisR. J.FirestoneJ. M.VegaW. A. (2005). The interaction of country of origin, acculturation, and gender role ideology on wife abuse. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 463-483. doi:10.1111/j.0038-4941.2005.00313.x
28.
Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department. (2003). Thematic Household Survey report (No. 14). Wan Chai: Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong SAR Government.
29.
Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department. (2014). Women and men in Hong Kong—Key statistics. Wan Chai: Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong SAR Government.
30.
JewkesR.LevinJ.Penn-KekanaL. (2002). Risk factors for domestic violence: Findings from a South African cross-sectional study. Social Science & Medicine, 55, 1603-1617. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00294-5
31.
JohnsonM. P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57, 283-294. doi:10.2307/353683
32.
LaveeY.KatzR. (2002). Division of labor, perceived fairness, and marital quality: The effect of gender ideology. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 27-39. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00027.x
33.
LeeM. K. (2000). Hong Kong family trends and their policy implications. Hung Hom: Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
34.
LentonR. L. (1995). Power versus feminist theories of wife abuse. Canadian Journal of Criminology/Revue Canadienne De Criminologie, 37, 305-330.
35.
MakG. C. L. (2012). Women and education. In ChoiS. Y. P.CheungF. M. C. (Eds.), Women and girls in Hong Kong: Current situations and future challenges (pp. 21-42). Shatin: Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies.
36.
NgoH. Y. (2012). Women and the economy. In ChoiS. Y. P.CheungF. M. C. (Eds.), Women and girls in Hong Kong: Current situations and future challenges (pp. 43-68). Shatin: Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies.
37.
SalariS. M.BaldwinB. M. (2002). Verbal, physical, and injurious aggression among intimate couples over time. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 523-550. doi:10.1177/0192513x02023004004
38.
SchumacherJ. A.Feldbau-KohnS.SlepA. M. S.HeymanR. E. (2001). Risk factors for male-to-female partner physical abuse. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 281-352. doi:10.1016/S1359-1789(00)00027-6
39.
SchwartzC. R. (2013). Trends and variation in assortative mating: Causes and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 451-470. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145544
40.
SmithM. D. (1990). Patriarchal ideology and wife beating: A test of a feminist hypothesis. Violence and Victims, 5, 257-273.
41.
StithS. M.SmithD. B.PennC. E.WardD. B.TrittD. (2004). Intimate partner physical abuse perpetration and victimization risk factors: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 65-98. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2003.09.001
42.
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. doi:10.1177/019251396017003001
43.
SugarmanD. B.FrankelS. L. (1996). Patriarchal ideology and wife assault: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Family Violence, 11, 13-40. doi:10.1007/Bf02333338
44.
SzinovaczM. E.EgleyL. C. (1995). Comparing one-partner and couple data on sensitive marital behaviors: The case of marital violence. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57, 995-1010. doi:10.2307/353418
45.
TangC. S. K. (1994). Prevalence of spouse aggression in Hong Kong. Journal of Family Violence, 9, 347-356.
46.
TangC. S. K. (1999a). Marital power and aggression in a community sample of Hong Kong Chinese families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 586-602.
47.
TangC. S. K. (1999b). Wife abuse in Hong Kong Chinese families: A community survey. Journal of Family Violence, 14, 179-191.
48.
TangC. S. K.WongD.CheungF. M. C. (2002). Social construction of women as legitimate victims of violence in Chinese societies. Violence Against Women, 8, 968-996.
49.
WeldonS.GilchristE. (2012). Implicit theories in intimate partner violence offenders. Journal of Family Violence, 27, 761-772. doi:10.1007/s10896-012-9465-x
50.
Women’s Commission. (2011). What do women and men in Hong Kong think about the status of women at home, work and in social environments? (Highlights of Survey Findings). Hong Kong: Author.
51.
XuQ.AndersonA. (2010). Domestic violence in Asian cultures. In RossL. E. (Ed.), The war against domestic violence (pp. 51-65). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
52.
XuX.CampbellJ. C.ZhuF.-C. (2001). Intimate partner violence against Chinese women: The past, present, and future. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2, 296-315.
53.
YickA. G. (2000). Predictors of physical spousal/intimate violence in Chinese American families. Journal of Family Violence, 15, 249-267. doi:10.1023/A:1007501518668
54.
YlloK. (1993). Through a feminist lens: Gender, power, and violence. In GellesR. J.LosekeD. R. (Eds.), Current controversies on family violence (pp. 47-62). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
55.
YlloK.StrausM. A. (1990). Patriarchy and violence against wives: The impact of structural and normative factors. In StrausM. A.GellesR. J. (Eds.), Physical violence in American families (pp. 383-399). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
