Judgments and Attributions of Intimate Partner Violence in China: The Role of Directionality, Gender Stereotypicality, and Ambivalent Sexism

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health problem worldwide. IPV-related perceptions and attitudes are linked to IPV’s actual perpetration and related victimization. There is a typical gender paradigm in IPV, wherein women are victims and men are perpetrators, which influences judgm...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Tie, Lei (Author) ; Zheng, Yong (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2023
In: Journal of interpersonal violence
Year: 2023, Volume: 38, Issue: 19/20, Pages: 10485-10513
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Description
Summary:Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health problem worldwide. IPV-related perceptions and attitudes are linked to IPV’s actual perpetration and related victimization. There is a typical gender paradigm in IPV, wherein women are victims and men are perpetrators, which influences judgments toward IPV. Some socio-cultural norms or unjust notions of gender are also intertwined with this paradigm and influence perceptions of IPV. This study explored judgments and attributions of IPV in the Chinese context while extensively considering directionality, gender stereotypes, and ambivalent sexism by surveying 887 participants online. Participants read 1 of 12 scenarios and made judgments and attributions of responsibility regarding IPV. The results indicate that hostile sexism is negatively correlated with IPV perception but positively correlated with its justification. The direction of perpetration and gender stereotypicality had some main effects on judgments of IPV, and there were some interactions between these factors. The perception level of IPV involving a traditional male partner was higher when the man was the perpetrator or when his female partner was traditional. In the unidirectional IPV scenarios, the perpetrators were judged as significantly more responsible than the victims, while in the bidirectional IPV scenarios, men were judged as significantly more responsible than women. Moreover, the relationship between gender stereotypicality and responsibility attributions to female partners was significantly moderated by benevolent sexism (BS). Participants with a high level of BS tended to attribute less responsibility to traditional women than non-traditional women in bidirectional IPV scenarios. Future studies on IPV should pay attention to the influence of directionality and gender stereotypes. More efforts ought to be made to reduce IPV and overcome gender role stereotypes and sexism.
ISSN:1552-6518
DOI:10.1177/08862605231172477