Alfredsson Helen, Ask Karl, von Borgstede Chris
University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Scand J Psychol. 2016 Feb;57(1):57-64. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12254. Epub 2015 Nov 6.
Public interventions are considered to be an important means of preventing intimate partner violence (IPV). What people believe about the nature of IPV is likely to determine their propensity to intervene, but little is known at present about IPV beliefs among the general public. In a survey of 650 Swedish citizens, beliefs about the prevalence and causes of IPV, and viable means of intervention were assessed. Respondents estimated, on average, that IPV occurs in almost one quarter of all intimate relationships in Sweden, and that IPV is particularly prevalent in low-income groups, among non-European immigrants, in suburban areas, and in couples under the age of 50 years. Physical violence was believed to be the most frequent form of abuse in male offender-female victim cases, whereas psychological violence was considered most frequent in other combinations of offender and victim gender. Female respondents estimated a higher prevalence of IPV, attributed less blame to IPV victims, and suggested more means of intervention, than did male respondents. The findings are discussed in relation to empirical prevalence estimates, and implications are proposed.
公共干预被认为是预防亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)的重要手段。人们对IPV本质的看法可能会决定他们进行干预的倾向,但目前对于普通公众对IPV的看法知之甚少。在一项对650名瑞典公民的调查中,评估了他们对IPV的发生率、成因以及可行干预手段的看法。受访者平均估计,在瑞典几乎四分之一的亲密关系中存在IPV,而且IPV在低收入群体、非欧洲移民、郊区以及年龄在50岁以下的夫妻中尤为普遍。在男性施暴-女性受害的案例中,身体暴力被认为是最常见的虐待形式,而在其他施暴者与受害者性别组合的案例中,心理暴力被认为最为常见。与男性受访者相比,女性受访者估计的IPV发生率更高,对IPV受害者的指责更少,并提出了更多的干预手段。本文结合实证发生率估计对研究结果进行了讨论,并提出了相关启示。