Sexual minority, individuals who are not heterosexual, college students experience high rates of intimate partner violence (IPV), which is linked to a myriad of deleterious outcomes. However, little work has evaluated whether there are differences in IPV outcomes among sexual minority college students as compared to heterosexual college students. Further, the extent to which minority stress at the institutional and individual level relates to IPV outcomes among sexual minority students is understudied. As such, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate IPV outcomes in a large sample of undergraduate students attending 18 medium- to large-sized universities across the contiguous U.S. Results supported that sexual minority victims of IPV had more anxious and depressive symptoms than heterosexual victims of IPV but were not more likely to engage in hazardous drinking. Further, analyses supported that several campus-level (but not individual-level) indicators of minority stress moderated the relation between IPV victimization and negative outcomes among sexual minority students, such that the association between IPV and negative outcomes was stronger among students embedded in campuses with higher levels of minority stressors. Results support the critical importance of interventions addressing campus-level minority stressors to reduce deleterious IPV outcomes among sexual minority college student victims.
This content will become publicly available on September 9, 2024
Research has largely neglected the issue of intimate partner violence (IPV) among transgender and gender-diverse (TGD; e.g., nonbinary and genderqueer) individuals. However, existing research suggests that TGD individuals are disproportionately affected by IPV. The current study sought to explore if and how rates of IPV vary among subgroups of TGD undergraduate students and contextual factors of IPV among TGD individuals including the co-occurrence of multiple forms of IPV victimization, the type of relationship in which IPV occurred, and the gender identity of the IPV perpetrator. Participants were 280 TGD undergraduate students attending 20 medium- and large-sized residential public universities across the contiguous United States. Of the entire sample of TGD undergraduate students ( N = 280), a total of 27.5% endorsed past 6-month IPV victimization (20.0% psychological, 6.1% physical, 8.9% sexual, 11.4% coercive control, and 5.7% LGBTQIA+-specific). Among only the participants who endorsed past 6-month IPV victimization ( N = 77), 45.4% reported one form of IPV victimization, 26.0% two forms, 22.1% three forms, and 6.5% four forms. Further, 41.3% of TGD IPV victims were in a casual relationship, 56.0% were in a serious relationship, and 2.7% were in multiple relationship types. Finally, 55.8% of victims reported their perpetrator was a man, 22.1% a woman, and 22.1% a TGD individual. No significant differences in rates of IPV were found between TGD respondents. These data highlight the urgent need for programming efforts on college campuses that are specifically designed to prevent and address IPV among and against TGD students. Future research should evaluate universal- and population-specific risk and protective factors for IPV among TGD individuals to inform prevention and response efforts for this highly vulnerable population.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10460698
- Publisher / Repository:
- SAGE Publications
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Interpersonal Violence
- Volume:
- 39
- Issue:
- 1-2
- ISSN:
- 0886-2605
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 458-469
- Size(s):
- ["p. 458-469"]
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
-
more » « less
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is a pervasive public health crisis that impacts individuals across the gender spectrum. Traditionally, IPV is conceptualized through a gendered lens, with men as the perpetrators and women as the victims. The current study explored the association between perpetrator/victim sex, prosecutor gender role attitudes, and prosecutorial decision-making in a case of alleged IPV. We hypothesized that prosecutors with more traditional gender role attitudes would be more lenient, and this effect to be exacerbated in cases involving a female perpetrator. Criminal prosecutors across the United States ( N = 94) completed the Male Role Norms Inventory—Revised and read case materials describing the alleged IPV between a heterosexual couple (e.g., arrest report, medical records). The victim/perpetrator sex was manipulated to involve either a female- (male victim) or male- (female victim) perpetrated IPV case. Results indicate that gender role attitudes were not associated with prosecutorial decision-making. However, prosecutors perceived the violence as more serious and the perpetrator as more likely to reoffend when the perpetrator was male; further, they attributed more blame to the female victim. An interaction between perpetrator sex and prosecutor gender role attitudes indicates those with more traditional beliefs were more likely to blame the female (rather than male) victim. These data suggest extralegal factors related to the perpetrator (i.e., perpetrator sex), rather than prosecutor individual differences (i.e., gender role attitudes), are associated with prosecutor discretionary decision-making. In tandem with real-world disparities in the prosecution of IPV based on perpetrator sex, the current research stresses the importance of exploring a diversity of factors that account for these observed differences.
-
Abstract Background In clinical research, there has been a call to move beyond individual psychosocial factors towards identifying cultural and social factors that inform mental health. Similar calls have been made in the eating disorders (ED) field underscoring the need to understand larger sociocultural influences on EDs. Discrimination is a social stressor that may influence mental health in similar ways to traumatic or adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Given the high rates of EDs and discrimination among marginalized groups, it is vital to understand the role of discrimination and ACEs as predictors of ED symptoms in these populations. The aim of this study is to examine how perceived discrimination predicts ED pathology when statistically adjusting for gender, race, and ACEs. Methods The diverse study sample consisted of 331 undergraduate students from a longitudinal cohort study (ages 18–24; 66% female; 35% White/non-Hispanic). Participants completed measures of everyday discrimination, ACEs, and ED pathology. Results Following adjustment for multiple statistical comparisons, the frequency of daily discrimination predicted all ED symptoms above and beyond history of ACEs. In follow-up analyses, number of reasons for discrimination predicted cognitive restraint and purging. Differences in ED symptomatology were found based on the reason for discrimination, gender, and race. Specifically, those who experienced weight discrimination endorsed higher scores on all ED symptoms, and those experiencing gender discrimination endorsed higher body dissatisfaction, cognitive restraint, and restriction. People of color endorsed higher restriction, while female participants endorsed higher scores on all ED symptom with the exception of cognitive restraint. Conclusion Discrimination is a salient risk factor for ED symptoms even when accounting for individuals’ history of ACEs. Future research should utilize an intersectional approach to examine how perceived discrimination affects ED pathology over time. (Word count: 234).more » « less
-
more » « less
Reproductive coercion (RC) is a type of intimate partner violence (IPV) characterized by partner interference with contraception or reproductive decision-making. Despite sexual minority people’s vulnerability to other forms of IPV, limited research has examined reproductive coercion in this population. Research on behavioral health impacts of reproductive coercion is also lacking, especially for sexual minorities. This study addressed these gaps by examining the occurrence and behavioral health impact of reproductive coercion among emerging adults, including both heterosexual and sexual minority people. In 2020, survey data were collected with emerging adults (aged 18–24 years) at a university in the southeastern United States (N = 387). We conducted bivariate analyses to explore associates of reproductive coercion and logistic regression to identify risk factors. We then conducted linear regression to investigate relationships between reproductive coercion and behavioral health outcomes, in the full sample and in separate models based on sexual attraction. One in 15 sampled students (6.3%) had experienced reproductive coercion. Sexual attraction was a significant risk factor for reproductive coercion, with increased rates among plurisexual (i.e., attracted to people of multiple genders) compared to monosexual students, in both bivariate (χ2(2) = 7.57, p = .023) and regression analyses ( B = 1.25, p = .012). Reproductive coercion was associated with worse behavioral health outcomes in bivariate and regression analyses (anxiety: B = 3.77, p = .001; depression: B = 3.26, p = .010; alcohol use: B = 2.32, p < .001). In separate linear regression models based on sexual attraction, RC was significantly associated with behavioral health indicators for participants who were attracted only to men and those attracted to people of multiple genders but not for participants who were attracted only to women. Findings indicated increased RC risk for plurisexual students compared to monosexuals and showed significant associations between RC and behavioral health outcomes, with differential effects based on sexual attraction. These novel findings support the need for continued research on RC, inclusive of nuanced conceptualizations of sexuality.
-
The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically altered family life in the United States. Over the long duration of the pandemic, parents had to adapt to shifting work conditions, virtual schooling, the closure of daycare facilities, and the stress of not only managing households without domestic and care supports but also worrying that family members may contract the novel coronavirus. Reports early in the pandemic suggest that these burdens have fallen disproportionately on mothers, creating concerns about the long-term implications of the pandemic for gender inequality and mothers’ well-being. Nevertheless, less is known about how parents’ engagement in domestic labor and paid work has changed throughout the pandemic, what factors may be driving these changes, and what the long-term consequences of the pandemic may be for the gendered division of labor and gender inequality more generally.more » « less
The Study on U.S. Parents’ Divisions of Labor During COVID-19 (SPDLC) collects longitudinal survey data from partnered U.S. parents that can be used to assess changes in parents’ divisions of domestic labor, divisions of paid labor, and well-being throughout and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of SPDLC is to understand both the short- and long-term impacts of the pandemic for the gendered division of labor, work-family issues, and broader patterns of gender inequality.
Survey data for this study is collected using Prolifc (www.prolific.co), an opt-in online platform designed to facilitate scientific research. The sample is comprised U.S. adults who were residing with a romantic partner and at least one biological child (at the time of entry into the study). In each survey, parents answer questions about both themselves and their partners. Wave 1 of SPDLC was conducted in April 2020, and parents who participated in Wave 1 were asked about their division of labor both prior to (i.e., early March 2020) and one month after the pandemic began. Wave 2 of SPDLC was collected in November 2020. Parents who participated in Wave 1 were invited to participate again in Wave 2, and a new cohort of parents was also recruited to participate in the Wave 2 survey. Wave 3 of SPDLC was collected in October 2021. Parents who participated in either of the first two waves were invited to participate again in Wave 3, and another new cohort of parents was also recruited to participate in the Wave 3 survey. This research design (follow-up survey of panelists and new cross-section of parents at each wave) will continue through 2024, culminating in six waves of data spanning the period from March 2020 through October 2024. An estimated total of approximately 6,500 parents will be surveyed at least once throughout the duration of the study.
SPDLC data will be released to the public two years after data is collected; Waves 1 and 2 are currently publicly available. Wave 3 will be publicly available in October 2023, with subsequent waves becoming available yearly. Data will be available to download in both SPSS (.sav) and Stata (.dta) formats, and the following data files will be available: (1) a data file for each individual wave, which contains responses from all participants in that wave of data collection, (2) a longitudinal panel data file, which contains longitudinal follow-up data from all available waves, and (3) a repeated cross-section data file, which contains the repeated cross-section data (from new respondents at each wave) from all available waves. Codebooks for each survey wave and a detailed user guide describing the data are also available. Response Rates: Of the 1,157 parents who participated in Wave 1, 828 (72%) also participated in the Wave 2 study. Presence of Common Scales: The following established scales are included in the survey:- Self-Efficacy, adapted from Pearlin's mastery scale (Pearlin et al., 1981) and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 2015) and taken from the American Changing Lives Survey
- Communication with Partner, taken from the Marriage and Relationship Survey (Lichter & Carmalt, 2009)
- Gender Attitudes, taken from the National Survey of Families and Households (Sweet & Bumpass, 1996)
- Depressive Symptoms (CES-D-10)
- Stress, measured using Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983)
The second wave of the SPDLC was fielded in November 2020 in two stages. In the first stage, all parents who participated in W1 of the SPDLC and who continued to reside in the United States were re-contacted and asked to participate in a follow-up survey. The W2 survey was posted on Prolific, and messages were sent via Prolific’s messaging system to all previous participants. Multiple follow-up messages were sent in an attempt to increase response rates to the follow-up survey. Of the 1,157 respondents who completed the W1 survey, 873 at least started the W2 survey. Data quality checks were employed in line with best practices for online surveys (e.g., removing respondents who did not complete most of the survey or who did not pass the attention filters). After data quality checks, 5.2% of respondents were removed from the sample, resulting in a final sample size of 828 parents (a response rate of 72%).
In the second stage, a new sample of parents was recruited. New parents had to meet the same sampling criteria as in W1 (be at least 18 years old, reside in the United States, reside with a romantic partner, and be a parent living with at least one biological child). Also similar to the W1 procedures, we oversampled men, Black individuals, individuals who did not complete college, and individuals who identified as politically conservative to increase sample diversity. A total of 1,207 parents participated in the W2 survey. Data quality checks led to the removal of 5.7% of the respondents, resulting in a final sample size of new respondents at Wave 2 of 1,138 parents.
In both stages, participants were informed that the survey would take approximately 20 minutes to complete. All panelists were provided monetary compensation in line with Prolific’s compensation guidelines, which require that all participants earn above minimum wage for their time participating in studies.
To be included in SPDLC, respondents had to meet the following sampling criteria at the time they enter the study: (a) be at least 18 years old, (b) reside in the United States, (c) reside with a romantic partner (i.e., be married or cohabiting), and (d) be a parent living with at least one biological child. Follow-up respondents must be at least 18 years old and reside in the United States, but may experience changes in relationship and resident parent statuses. Smallest Geographic Unit: U.S. StateThis work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. In accordance with this license, all users of these data must give appropriate credit to the authors in any papers, presentations, books, or other works that use the data. A suggested citation to provide attribution for these data is included below:
To help provide estimates that are more representative of U.S. partnered parents, the SPDLC includes sampling weights. Weights can be included in statistical analyses to make estimates from the SPDLC sample representative of U.S. parents who reside with a romantic partner (married or cohabiting) and a child aged 18 or younger based on age, race/ethnicity, and gender. National estimates for the age, racial/ethnic, and gender profile of U.S. partnered parents were obtained using data from the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS). Weights were calculated using an iterative raking method, such that the full sample in each data file matches the nationally representative CPS data in regard to the gender, age, and racial/ethnic distributions within the data. This variable is labeled CPSweightW2 in the Wave 2 dataset, and CPSweightLW2 in the longitudinal dataset (which includes Waves 1 and 2). There is not a weight variable included in the W1-W2 repeated cross-section data file.
Carlson, Daniel L. and Richard J. Petts. 2022. Study on U.S. Parents’ Divisions of Labor During COVID-19 User Guide: Waves 1-2.
