• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Analysis of a Modification to the Sexual Experiences Survey to Assess Intimate Partner Sexual Violence.对性经历调查的修改进行分析,以评估亲密伴侣性暴力。
J Sex Res. 2021 Nov-Dec;58(9):1140-1150. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2020.1766404. Epub 2020 Jun 2.
2
Intimate Partner Sexual Violence: A Review of Terms, Definitions, and Prevalence.亲密伴侣性暴力:术语、定义及患病率综述
Trauma Violence Abuse. 2015 Jul;16(3):316-35. doi: 10.1177/1524838014557290. Epub 2015 Jan 4.
3
Women's Experiences of Sexual Violence in Intimate Relationships: Applying a New Taxonomy.女性在亲密关系中遭受性暴力的经历:应用新分类法。
J Interpers Violence. 2021 Jul;36(13-14):NP7813-NP7839. doi: 10.1177/0886260519827667. Epub 2019 Feb 22.
4
"It Went to the Very Heart of Who I Was as a Woman": The Invisible Impacts of Intimate Partner Sexual Violence.“这直击了作为女性的我的内心”:亲密伴侣性暴力的无形影响。
Qual Health Res. 2021 Jan;31(2):287-297. doi: 10.1177/1049732320967659. Epub 2020 Oct 29.
5
"Counteract the gaslighting" - a thematic analysis of open-ended responses about what women survivors of intimate partner sexual violence need from service providers.“抵制煤气灯效应”——对关于亲密伴侣性暴力女性幸存者需要服务提供者提供什么的开放式回答的主题分析。
BMC Womens Health. 2024 Feb 9;24(1):110. doi: 10.1186/s12905-024-02943-1.
6
Sexual Violence Perpetration Against Intimate Partners: Current Progress and Future Directions.亲密伴侣间性暴力的实施:当前进展与未来方向
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2022 Nov;24(11):661-670. doi: 10.1007/s11920-022-01373-w. Epub 2022 Oct 5.
7
Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization--national intimate partner and sexual violence survey, United States, 2011.性暴力、跟踪和亲密伴侣暴力受害的流行率和特征——2011 年美国全国亲密伴侣和性暴力调查。
MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014 Sep 5;63(8):1-18.
8
Intimate partner sexual violence: a comparison of foreign- versus US-born physically abused Latinas.亲密伴侣性暴力:受身体虐待的美籍拉丁裔与非美籍拉丁裔的比较。
J Urban Health. 2014 Feb;91(1):122-35. doi: 10.1007/s11524-013-9817-8.
9
Toward an Ecological Understanding of Intimate Partner Sexual Violence.迈向对亲密伴侣性暴力的生态理解。
J Interpers Violence. 2021 Dec;36(23-24):11704-11727. doi: 10.1177/0886260519900298. Epub 2020 Jan 20.
10
Intimate Partner Sexual Violence: An Often Overlooked Problem.亲密伴侣性暴力:一个经常被忽视的问题。
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2019 Mar;28(3):363-374. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2017.6811. Epub 2018 Oct 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Development and Validation of the Intimate Partner Sexual Violence Scale (IPSVS): A Multi-Dimensional Scale to Measure Sexual Violence in Intimate Relationships.亲密伴侣性暴力量表(IPSVS)的编制与验证:一种用于测量亲密关系中性暴力的多维量表。
J Interpers Violence. 2025 Sep;40(17-18):4082-4103. doi: 10.1177/08862605241287803. Epub 2024 Oct 15.
2
"I Think You Covered the Three Levels of Drugs and Consent": Qualitatively Testing Different Operationalizations of an Alcohol and Other Drugs-Involved Sexual Violence.“我认为你涵盖了药物和同意的三个层面”:定性测试涉及酒精和其他药物的性暴力的不同操作化。
Arch Sex Behav. 2024 Oct;53(9):3595-3608. doi: 10.1007/s10508-024-02947-w. Epub 2024 Jul 22.
3
The Revised Sexual Experiences Survey Victimization Version (SES-V): Conceptualization, Modifications, Items and Scoring.修订后的性经历调查受害版本(SES-V):概念化、修改、项目和评分。
J Sex Res. 2024 Jul;61(6):839-867. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2024.2358407. Epub 2024 Jul 7.
4
Alcohol-involved sexual assault in the US military: a scoping review.美国军队中与酒精有关的性侵犯:范围综述。
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2023;14(2):2282020. doi: 10.1080/20008066.2023.2282020. Epub 2023 Nov 27.
5
Sexual Victimization Among Sexual and Gender Minoritized Groups: Recent Research and Future Directions.性少数群体中的性受害问题:最新研究与未来方向。
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2023 May;25(5):183-191. doi: 10.1007/s11920-023-01420-0. Epub 2023 Apr 4.
6
Valid for who? A preliminary investigation of the validity of two sexual victimization questionnaires in men and sexual minorities.对谁有效?对两份性侵害调查问卷在男性和性少数群体中的有效性进行的初步调查。
Am J Crim Justice. 2021 Feb;46(1):168-185. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09589-3. Epub 2021 Jan 9.

本文引用的文献

1
Women's Experiences of Sexual Violence in Intimate Relationships: Applying a New Taxonomy.女性在亲密关系中遭受性暴力的经历:应用新分类法。
J Interpers Violence. 2021 Jul;36(13-14):NP7813-NP7839. doi: 10.1177/0886260519827667. Epub 2019 Feb 22.
2
Intimate Partner Sexual Violence: An Often Overlooked Problem.亲密伴侣性暴力:一个经常被忽视的问题。
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2019 Mar;28(3):363-374. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2017.6811. Epub 2018 Oct 18.
3
Unwanted Sexual Acts Among University Students: Correlates of Victimization and Perpetration.大学生中的非自愿性行为:受害与施害的相关因素
J Interpers Violence. 2021 Jan;36(1-2):NP504-NP526. doi: 10.1177/0886260517734221. Epub 2017 Oct 6.
4
Characterizing Sexual Violence in Intimate Relationships: An Examination of Blame Attributions and Rape Acknowledgment.描述亲密关系中的性暴力:对责备归因和强奸认知的考察。
J Interpers Violence. 2021 Jan;36(1-2):469-490. doi: 10.1177/0886260517726972. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
5
Unintentional Misreporting on Self-Report Measures of Sexually Aggressive Behavior: An Interview Study.无意错误报告性行为侵犯的自陈式测量工具:一项访谈研究。
J Sex Res. 2017 Oct;54(8):971-983. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2017.1304519. Epub 2017 Apr 7.
6
Reliability and Validity of the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Forms Victimization and Perpetration.性经历调查简表中受害与施害情况的信度与效度
Violence Vict. 2017 Feb 1;32(1):78-92. doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-15-00110.
7
THE EFFECTS OF FRAME OF REFERENCE ON RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ABOUT SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIMIZATION AND PERPETRATION.参照框架对性侵犯受害和犯罪相关问题回答的影响。
Psychol Women Q. 2005 Dec;29(4):364-373. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00236.x. Epub 2005 Nov 23.
8
A Scientific Answer to a Scientific Question: The Gender Debate on Intimate Partner Violence.科学回应科学问题:亲密伴侣暴力中的性别之争。
Trauma Violence Abuse. 2017 Apr;18(2):145-154. doi: 10.1177/1524838015596963. Epub 2016 Jun 23.
9
Intimate Partner Sexual Violence: A Review of Terms, Definitions, and Prevalence.亲密伴侣性暴力:术语、定义及患病率综述
Trauma Violence Abuse. 2015 Jul;16(3):316-35. doi: 10.1177/1524838014557290. Epub 2015 Jan 4.
10
How to Score the Sexual Experiences Survey? A Comparison of Nine Methods.如何对性经历调查问卷进行评分?九种方法的比较。
Psychol Violence. 2014 Oct;4(4):445-461. doi: 10.1037/a0037494.

对性经历调查的修改进行分析,以评估亲密伴侣性暴力。

Analysis of a Modification to the Sexual Experiences Survey to Assess Intimate Partner Sexual Violence.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of North Dakota.

Department of Psychology, University of Akron.

出版信息

J Sex Res. 2021 Nov-Dec;58(9):1140-1150. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2020.1766404. Epub 2020 Jun 2.

DOI:10.1080/00224499.2020.1766404
PMID:32484752
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7708518/
Abstract

Greater accuracy is needed in the assessment of sexual victimization that occurs in intimate relationships. Existing assessment strategies in the literature often represent two distinct approaches - intimate partner violence specific strategies vs. sexual violence specific strategies. The current study compared multiple distinct strategies for assessing intimate partner sexual victimization (IPSV) and evaluated a modification that optimizes intimate partner and sexual violence specific strategies. Two samples of undergraduate women were recruited. Sample 1 ( = 236) completed the Severity of Violence Against Women Scales (SVAWS) and a modified version Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) in which participants were cued to respond both for romantic partners and non-partners (referred to as the SES-RP/NP). Sample 2 (N = 206) completed the SVAWS and was randomized to either the traditional SES-SFV or the SES-RP/NP. Across samples, the prevalence of IPSV varied based on the measure used (SVAWS = 11.7%; SES-SFV = 17.0%; SES-RP/NP = 25.4%). The SES-RP/NP identified significantly more IPSV than the SES-SFV, SVAWS, and prior studies. Both the SES-SFV and the SES-RP/NP were positively and significantly associated with the SVAWS. The results suggested that optimal measurement of IPSV would consider both intimate partner and sexual violence strategies.

摘要

需要更准确地评估发生在亲密关系中的性侵犯。文献中的现有评估策略通常代表两种截然不同的方法——特定于亲密伴侣暴力的策略与特定于性暴力的策略。本研究比较了评估亲密伴侣性侵犯(IPSV)的多种不同策略,并评估了优化亲密伴侣和性暴力特定策略的修改版。招募了两个本科女生样本。样本 1(n=236)完成了《妇女暴力严重程度量表》(SVAWS)和经修改的《性经历调查-简短形式受害》(SES-SFV),其中要求参与者对浪漫伴侣和非伴侣(称为 SES-RP/NP)做出回应。样本 2(n=206)完成了 SVAWS,并随机分配到传统的 SES-SFV 或 SES-RP/NP。在两个样本中,基于使用的测量工具,IPSV 的患病率有所不同(SVAWS=11.7%;SES-SFV=17.0%;SES-RP/NP=25.4%)。SES-RP/NP 比 SES-SFV、SVAWS 和之前的研究识别出更多的 IPSV。SES-SFV 和 SES-RP/NP 均与 SVAWS 呈正相关且显著相关。结果表明,对 IPSV 的最佳测量将同时考虑亲密伴侣和性暴力策略。