Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW, Australia.
Australian Catholic University, Strathfield, NSW, Australia.
J Interpers Violence. 2024 Aug;39(15-16):3738-3763. doi: 10.1177/08862605241234352. Epub 2024 Feb 26.
Intimate partner violence (IPV) disproportionally affects women. Using the vulnerability-adaptation stress model, we examined adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), self-esteem, and hope as vulnerability indicators and relationship status and length, positive and negative affect, and socioeconomic status (SES) as stressors to ascertain the risk for IPV. Women ( = 491, = 37.15, standard deviation = 12.51) completed an online survey comprised of the Positive and Negative Affect Scale, Rosenberg's Self-esteem Scale, Snyder's Hope Scale, ACE questionnaire, Composite Abuse Scale Revised-Short Form, and demographic questions. Factor analysis identified four ACE factors of sexual abuse, physical or psychological abuse, witnessing domestic violence, and household dysfunction. A five-step hierarchical multiple regression identified that greater exposure to physical or psychological child abuse was associated with an increased risk of IPV (Step 2), = 0.73 [0.16, 1.34]. Lower self-esteem, = -0.30 [-0.47, -0.14] predicted IPV (Step 3). Age = 0.07 [0.01, 0.13], negative affect, = 0.39 [0.19, 0.59], and relationship length, = -1.24 [-2.16, 0.41] were associated with a higher risk of IPV (Step 4). In Step 5, previous variables attenuated to non-significance while age, = 0.07 [0.01, 0.13], negative affect, = 0.39 [0.19, 0.59], and relationship length = -1.25 [-2.16, 0.41] remained significant. While the key findings of this study were inconsistent with some commonly reported findings (e.g., ACEs, self-esteem, hope, relationship status, SES, age), these inconsistencies are important to highlight given the factorial approach to examining ACEs, the comprehensive analyses conducted, and our examination of these variables' direct relationship to IPV. The study was limited by its cross-sectional nature, higher prevalence of IPV victims, and not examining IPV sub-types. Similar studies need to be conducted for other relationship types and victimized individuals (e.g., same-sex relationships and male victims) to provide a complete picture of risk factors for IPV.
亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）不成比例地影响女性。我们使用脆弱性-适应-压力模型，检查了不良的童年经历（ACEs）、自尊和希望作为脆弱性指标，以及关系状况和持续时间、积极和消极影响以及社会经济地位（SES）作为压力源，以确定 IPV 的风险。女性（n=491，=37.15，标准差=12.51）完成了一项在线调查，其中包括积极和消极情绪量表、罗森伯格自尊量表、斯奈德希望量表、ACE 问卷、综合虐待量表修订版-短表和人口统计学问题。因素分析确定了 ACE 的四个因素，包括性虐待、身体或心理虐待、目睹家庭暴力和家庭功能障碍。五步分层多元回归确定，更多地暴露于身体或心理上的儿童虐待与 IPV 的风险增加有关（步骤 2），β=0.73[0.16，1.34]。较低的自尊，β=-0.30[-0.47，-0.14]，预测 IPV（步骤 3）。年龄，β=0.07[0.01，0.13]，消极影响，β=0.39[0.19，0.59]，关系持续时间，β=-1.24[-2.16，0.41]与更高的 IPV 风险相关（步骤 4）。在步骤 5 中，先前的变量衰减到无意义，而年龄，β=0.07[0.01，0.13]，消极影响，β=0.39[0.19，0.59]，以及关系持续时间，β=-1.25[-2.16，0.41]仍然显著。尽管本研究的主要发现与一些常见的报告发现不一致（例如，ACEs、自尊、希望、关系状况、SES、年龄），但鉴于我们采用的是因素分析方法来检查 ACEs，进行了全面的分析，并直接检查了这些变量与 IPV 的关系，这些不一致之处非常重要。该研究受到其横断面性质的限制，即 IPV 受害者的患病率较高，以及没有检查 IPV 的亚型。需要对其他关系类型和受害个体（例如，同性关系和男性受害者）进行类似的研究，以提供 IPV 风险因素的完整图景。
