Ranganathan Meghna, Heise Lori, Peterman Amber, Roy Shalini, Hidrobo Melissa
Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Tavistock Place, WC1H 9SH, London, UK.
Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, 615 N. Wolfe Street, Room E4644, 21205, Baltimore, MD, USA.
SSM Popul Health. 2021 May 15;14:100822. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100822. eCollection 2021 Jun.
Research on intimate partner violence (IPV) has progressed in the last decade in the fields of public health and economics, with under-explored potential for cross-fertilisation. We examine the theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches that each discipline uses to conceptualise and study IPV and offer a perspective on their relative advantages. Public health takes a broad theoretical perspective anchored in the socio-ecological framework, considering multiple and synergistic drivers of IPV, while economics focuses on bargaining models which highlight individual power and factors that shape this power. These perspectives shape empirical work, with public health examining multi-faceted interventions, risk and mediating factors, while economics focuses on causal modelling of specific economic and institutional factors and economic-based interventions. The disciplines also have differing views on measurement and ethics in primary research. We argue that efforts to understand and address IPV would benefit if the two disciplines collaborated more closely and combined the best traditions of both fields.
在过去十年中，亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）研究在公共卫生和经济学领域取得了进展，但其交叉融合的潜力尚未得到充分探索。我们审视了每个学科用于概念化和研究亲密伴侣暴力的理论视角和方法论，并对它们的相对优势提出了一种观点。公共卫生从社会生态框架所奠定的广泛理论视角出发，考虑亲密伴侣暴力的多种协同驱动因素，而经济学则侧重于讨价还价模型，该模型突出个体权力以及塑造这种权力的因素。这些视角塑造了实证研究工作，公共卫生研究多方面的干预措施、风险和中介因素，而经济学则专注于特定经济和制度因素的因果建模以及基于经济的干预措施。这两个学科在基础研究的测量和伦理方面也有不同观点。我们认为，如果这两个学科更紧密地合作并结合两个领域的最佳传统，那么理解和应对亲密伴侣暴力的努力将会受益。
