Public perceptions of the severity of intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) play a crucial role in its prevention. This study examines the impact of multiple factors related to the scenario and respondent characteristics on the perceived severity of IPVAW. To achieve this, a factorial survey design was implemented using a non-probability-based sample in Spain (N = 1007). The results indicate that 90.3% of respondents rated the scenario as severe. The perceived severity was influenced by both the details of the scenario and the characteristics of the respondents. These findings can inform the design of targeted awareness campaigns.
AizpuruaE.CoppJ.RicarteJ. J.VázquezD. (2017). Controlling behaviors and intimate partner violence among women in Spain: An examination of individual, partner, and relationship risk factors for physical and psychological abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(1–2), 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517723744
2.
AizpuruaE.O’ConnellC. (2021). Men’s psychological violence against women. In ShackelfordT. K. (Ed), The Sage Handbook of Domestic Violence (pp. 98–112). Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529742343
3.
AntaiD.AntaiJ. (2009). Collective violence and attitudes of women toward intimate partner violence: Evidence from the Niger Delta. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 9(12), 10–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-698X-9-12
AuspurgK.HinzT.WalzenbachS. (2019). Are factorial survey experiments prone to survey mode effects? In LavrakasP.TraugottM.KennedyC.HolbrookA.de LeeuwE.WestB. (Eds), Experimental methods in survey research: Techniques that combine random sampling with random assignment (pp. 371–392). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119083771.ch19
6.
BaldryA. C.PagliaroS. (2014). Helping victims of intimate partner violence: The influence of group norms among lay people and the police. Psychology of Violence, 4(3), 334–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034844
7.
BaldryA. C.WinkelF. W. (Eds) (2008). Intimate partner violence prevention and intervention: The risk assessment and management approach. Nova Science Publishers.
8.
BloodR. O.Jr.WolfeD. M. (1960). Husbands and wives: The dynamics of family living. Free Press Glencoe.
9.
CapezzaN. M.ArriagaX. B. (2008a). Factors associated with acceptance of psychological aggression against women. Violence Against Women, 14(6), 612–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801208319004
10.
CapezzaN. M.ArriagaX. B. (2008b). You can degrade but you can’t hit: Differences in perceptions of psychological versus physical aggression. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(2), 225–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407507087957
11.
CapezzaN. M.D’IntinoL. A.FlynnM. A.ArriagaX. B. (2017). Perceptions of psychological abuse: The role of perpetrator gender, victim’s response, and sexism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(3–4), 1414–1436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517741215
DennisonS. M.ThompsonC. M. (2011). Intimate partner violence: The effect of gender and contextual factors on community perceptions of harm, and suggested victim and criminal justice responses. Violence & Victims, 26(3), 347–363. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.26.3.347
15.
DülmerH. (2016). The factorial survey: Design selection and its impact on reliability and internal validity. Sociological Methods & Research, 45(2), 304–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124115582269
16.
EkehammarB.AkramiN.ArayaT. (2000). Development and validation of Swedish classical and modern sexism scales. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41(4), 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9450.00203
17.
ErmerA. E.RoachA. L.ColemanM.GanongL. (2017). Deconstructing attitudes about intimate partner violence and bystander intervention: The roles of perpetrator gender and severity of aggression. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(1–2), 896–919. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517737556
18.
EsquedaC. W.HarrisonL. A. (2005). The influence of gender role stereotypes, the woman’s race, and level of provocation and resistance on domestic violence culpability attributions. Sex Roles, 53(11–12), 821–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/11199s-005-8295-1
19.
EstébanezI.VázquezN. (2013). La desigualdad de género y el sexismo en las redes sociales. Servicio Central de Publicaciones del Gobierno Vasco.
Ferrer-PérezV. A.Bosch-FiolE. (2014). Gender violence as a social problem in Spain: Attitudes and acceptability. Sex Roles, 70(11–12), 506–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0322-z
25.
FloodM.PeaseB. (2009). Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10(2), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838009334131
26.
FollingstadD. R.HelffC. M.BinfordR. V.RungeM. M.WhiteJ. D. (2004). Lay persons’ versus psychologists’ judgments of psychologically aggressive actions by a husband and wife. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(8), 916–942. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260504266229
27.
FollingstadD. R.RogersM. J. (2014). The nature and prevalence of partner psychological abuse in a national sample of adults. Violence & Victims, 29(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.09-160
28.
GonzaloA. (2009). La aplicación de la ley de medidas de protección integral contra la violencia de género [The enforcement of the Act on Comprehensive Protection Measures against Gender Violence]. Participación Educativa, 11, 105–109.
29.
GraciaE.HerreroJ. (2006). Public attitudes toward reporting partner violence against women and reporting behavior. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(3), 759–768. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00288.x
30.
GraciaE.LilaM.SantirsoF. A. (2020). Attitudes toward intimate partner violence against women in the European Union: A systematic review. European Psychologist, 25(2), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000392
31.
GrahamK.BernardsS.WilsnackS. C.GmelG. (2011). Alcohol may not cause partner violence, but it seems to make it worse: A cross national comparison of the relationship between alcohol and severity of partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(8), 1503–1523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260510370596
32.
GrigaitėU.KaraliusM.JankauskaitėM. (2019). Between experience and social ‘norms’, identification and compliance: Economic and sexual intimate partner violence against women in Lithuania. Journal of Gender-Based Violence, 3(3), 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1332/239868019X15623411271876
33.
HammockG. S.RichardsonD. S.WilliamsC.JanitA. S. (2015). Perceptions of psychological and physical aggression between heterosexual partners. Journal of Family Violence, 30(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-014-9645-y
34.
HarrisonL. A.EsquedaC. W. (2000). Effects of race and victim drinking on domestic violence attributions. Sex Roles, 42(11/12), 1043–1057. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007040701889
35.
HerreroJ.RodríguezF. J.TorresA. (2017). Acceptability of partner violence in 51 societies: The role of sexism and attitudes toward violence in social relationships. Violence Against Women, 23(3), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216642870
36.
HutchinsonK. M. (2012). Predictors of college students’ dating violence perceptions and help-seeking recommendations [Doctoral dissertation]. The University of Akron.
37.
KarlssonM.WemrellM.MerloJ.IvertA. (2020). Intimate partner violence against women in the EU: A multilevel analysis of the contextual and individual impact on public perceptions. Women & Criminal Justice, 32(5), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974454.2020.1835792
38.
KposowaA. J.Aly EzzatD. (2016). Religiosity, conservatism, and acceptability of anti-female spousal violence in Egypt. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(12), 2525–2550. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516660976
39.
KrosnickJ. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(3), 213–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050305
40.
LeónC. M.AizpurúaE. (2021). Tipologías basadas en la adhesión a los mitos sobre la violencia de género: Evidencias de un análisis de clases latentes. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 79(1), e179. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2021.79.1.19.135
41.
LeonC. M.AizpuruaE.RolleroC. (2021). None of my business? An experiment analyzing willingness to formally report incidents of intimate partner violence against women. Violence Against Women, 28(9), 2163–2185. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012211025990
42.
Martín-FernándezM.GraciaE.LilaM. (2022). Measuring perceived severity of intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) among the general population and IPVAW offenders. Psychosocial Intervention, 31(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2022a8
43.
MegíasJ. L.Toro-GarcíaV.Carretero-DiosH. (2018). The acceptance of myths about intimate partner violence against women (AMIVAW) scale: Development and validation in Spanish and English. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42(1), 44–61. https://doi:10.1177/0361684317742638
44.
MerrillG. S. (1996). Ruling the exceptions: Same sex battering and domestic violence theory. In RenzettiC. M.Harvey MileyC. (Eds), Violence in Gay and Lesbian Partnerships (pp. 9–23). Harrington Park Press.
45.
Nardi-RodríguezA.Pastor-MiraM. A.López-RoigS.Ferrer-PérezV. (2018). Identifying beliefs behind boys’ use of mobile phones to monitor girlfriends and girls’ acceptance: A reasoned-action approach. Journal of Youth Studies, 21(7), 922–939. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2017.1422600
46.
PagliaroS.PacilliM. G.BaldryA. C. (2020). Bystanders’ reactions to intimate partner violence: An experimental approach. European Review of Social Psychology, 31(1), 149–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2020.1776031
RolleroC.BergagnaE.TartagliaS. (2019). What is violence? The role of sexism and social dominance orientation in recognizing violence against women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(21–22), 11349–11366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519888525
49.
Saeed AliT.AbbasA.AtherF. (2014). Associations of controlling behavior, physical and sexual violence with health symptoms. Journal of Women’s Health Care, 03(06), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0420.1000202
50.
Sánchez-HernándezM. D.Herrera-EnríquezM. C.ExpósitoF. (2020). Controlling behaviors in couple relationships in the digital age: Acceptability of gender violence, sexism, and myths about romantic love. Psychosocial Intervention, 29(2), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2020a1
SylaskaK. M.WaltersA. S. (2014). Testing the extent of the gender trap: College students’ perceptions of and reactions to intimate partner violence. Sex Roles, 70(3–4), 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0344-1
53.
TaylorC. A.SorensonS. B. (2005). Community-based norms about intimate partner violence: Putting attributions of fault and responsibility into context. Sex Roles, 53(7–8), 573–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-7143-7
54.
TestaM.DerrickJ. L. (2014). A daily process examination of the temporal association between alcohol use and verbal and physical aggression in community couples. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors: Journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 28(1), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032988
55.
VázquezD.AizpuruaE.CoppJ.RicarteJ. J. (2019). Perceptions of violence against women in Europe: Assessing individual and country-level factors. European Journal of Criminology, 18(4), 566–584. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370819859462
56.
Vives-CasesC.La Parra-CasadoD.Gil-GonzálezD.CaballeroP. (2018). Acceptability of violence against women among the Roma population in Spain. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(11–12), 5795–5812. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518807910
57.
WalkerK.SleathE.TramontanoC. (2017). The prevalence and typologies of controlling behaviors in a general population sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(1–2), 474–503. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517731785
58.
WalzenbachS. (2019). Hiding sensitive topics by design? An experiment on the reduction of social desirability bias in factorial surveys. Survey Research Methods, 13(1), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2019.v13i1.7243
59.
Wilchek-AviadY.Neeman-HavivV.ShaganN.Ota-shushanA. (2019). The public perception of female and male violence in marital relationships. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 88(4), 312–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1561025
60.
WitteT. H.KopkinM. R.HollisS. D. (2015). Is it dating violence or just “drunken behavior”? Judgments of intimate partner violence when the perpetrator is under the influence of alcohol. Substance Use & Misuse, 50(11), 1421–1426. https://doi.org/10.3109/10826084.2015.1018539
61.
WordenA. P.CarlsonB. E. (2005). Attitudes and beliefs about domestic violence: Results of a public opinion survey: II. Beliefs about causes. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20(10), 1219–1243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260505278531
Zapata-CalventeL. (2017). Macrosocial, ideological, and individual factors in intimate partner violence against women (Ref. AP2012-2824) [Doctoral dissertation]. Universidad de Granada.
64.
Zapata-CalventeL.MegíasJ. L. (2017). Social perception of intimate partner violence according to the motivations and sex of the aggressor and the ideology and sex of the observers/Percepción social de la violencia de pareja en función de las motivaciones y sexo del/a agresor/a y de la ideología y sexo de los/as observadores/as. Revista de Psicología Social, 32(2), 301–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/02134748.2017.1297355
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
