Gender Differences In The Relation Of
Dyadic Types Of Partner Violence To Depression
Among University Students In 15 Nations
Murray A. Straus
Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire
Durham, NH 03824 603-862-2594 murray.straus@unh.edu
Website: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2
Zeev Winstok
Center for the Study of Society, University of Haifa,
Mount Carmel, Haifa 31905, Israel
zeevwin@research.haifa.ac.il
• Presented at the Society For the Study Of Social Problems annual meeting, New
York 8 August 2013.
• This is one of a series reporting results of the International Parenting Study directed
by Angele Fauchier (angele.fauchier@unh.edu), and the Dyadic Types Research
Program. Papers on these and related topics can be downloaded from
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2
• The work was partly supported by National Institute
of Mental Health grant
.
T32MH15161, the University of New Hampshire.
1
Questions To Be Addressed
1. What percent of university student couples in 15 nations experienced
violence in their relationships in the previous 12 months?
2. Of those who experienced violence, what percent were in each of
three “Dyadic Types” (DTs):
Male-Only, Female-Only, Both-Assaulted?
3. What is the relationship between violence in a relationship and
depression and does this vary depending on:
A. Whether the partner was the victim or the aggressor, or both
victim and aggressor?
B. Whether it is the male or female partner?
Results are somewhat surprising
4. What is a plausible theory to explain them?
5. What are the implications for
A. Theories to explain PV?
B. Methodology for research on PV?
C. Efforts to prevent and treat PV?
2
The International Parenting Study
15 Nations, 11,408 university students
Analyses control for variables such as:
• Age of student
• Socially desirable responding
• Parent’s education
3
Table 1. International Parenting Study Sample Characteristics for 15 Nations
Region
Nation
N
% Female Mean Age
11408
Total
69.8%
21.07
443
Asia
TWN
Taiwan
57.7%
20.19
473
HKG
Hong Kong
66.6%
22.99
889
Europe
BEL
Belgium
74.2%
19.76
973
GRC
Greece
72.5%
20.89
260
ITA
Italy
77.7%
21.82
378
POL
Poland
50.9%
21.42
173
RUS
Russia
54.0%
19.48
1122
GBR
Scotland
67.2%
20.24
189
SVN
Slovenia
86.2%
21.93
196
CHE
Switzerland
95.3%
23.92
533
NOR
Norway
72.5%
22.39
106
ESP
Spain
89.3%
21.55
366
Middle East
ISR
Israel
60.9%
23.82
1586
N. America
CAN
Canada
74.7%
23.18
3721
USA
United States
68.1%
20.28
4
Measures
Partner violence: Short form of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales
Straus, M. A., & Douglas, E. M. (2004). A short form of the
Revised Conflict Tactics Scales, and typologies for seventy and
mutuality. Violence and Victims, 19, 507-520.
Cases will be analyzed by comparing “Dyadic Types” of partner
violence
Depression: Major Depression Inventory
Olsen, L. R., Jensen, D. V., Noerholm, V., Martiny, K., & Bech, P.
(2003). The internal and external validity of the Major Depression
Inventory in measuring
depressive states. Psychological
Medicine, 33, 351-356.
5
Data Analysis
Analysis of covariance
Controlled for:
• Education of father
• Education of mother (are the results just a reflection of SES?
• Misbehavior as a child (are results just a continuation of a long –standing pattern)
• Corporal punishment by father As above
• Corporal punishment by mother As above
• Age of student at time of study (because older persons have lower crime rates
• Limited Disclosure scale (do the results just reflect that willingness to disclose one
type of socially undesirable behavior is associated with willingness to disclose
other types)
• Nation in which data was collected There are important differences between
nations in the prevalence of crime. National differences in crime, include DT are
analyzed elsewhere (cite??). The focus of this study is whether there are effects of
DT that are in addition to the national context effects.
6
Dyadic Types (DTs)
Everyone Agrees On The Need To Take Into Account The Behavior
Of Both Partners To Deal With Relationship Issues. But Few Do
 DTs are a practical method of doing taking the behavior of both
partners into account
 Three DTs: * Male Partner Only
* Female Partner Only
* Both partners engage in the behavior
 Practical because
• DTs obtained by just cross tabulating the behavior of the male
partner by that of the female partner
• If the behavior is an interaction in which both participated, such
as violence, data obtained from just one of the partners, has
the same validity (or lack of) as when both partners
Dyadic Assault Types For Dating Relationships
Among 11,408 University Students in 15 Nations - Any Assault
Q 1. What percent
of university
student couples in
15 nations
experienced
violence in their
relationships in
previous 12
months?
Prevalence
Men
14%
Women 18%
47%
43%
Q 2 Of those who
experienced
violence, what
percent were in
each of three
“Dyadic Types”
(DTs):
10%
Straus, M. A., & Winstok, Z. (2013). Gender Differences in the Relation Of Dyadic Types Of Partner Violence To
Depression Among University students in 15 nations. Paper presented at the Society For The Study Of Social
Problems Annual Meeting, New York.
8
Are These Percentages Unique To This Student Sample?
U.S. National Comorbidity Study (N=8,098)*
60
Predominant
Pattern Is
Both-Violent
Male-Only and
Female-Only about
same %
Same pattern as in
current study and
in more than 50
studies** which
found:
54
50
%
40
30
24
23
Male-Only
Female-Only
20
10
0
Both-Assault
* Kessler, R. C., Molnar, B. E., Feurer, I. D., & Appelbaum, M. (2001). Patterns and mental health predictors of domestic violence in the United
States: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey. International Journal Of Law And Psychiatry, 24(4-5), 487-508.
9
- 48 studies
Ada[ted from Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Selwyn, C., & Rohling, M. L. (2012). Rates of
Bidirectional Versus Unidirectional Intimate Partner Violence Across Samples, Sexual
Orientations, and Race/Ethnicities: A Comprehensive Review. Partner Abuse, 3(2), 199-230.
doi: 10.1891/1946-6560.3.2.199
10
Dyadic Types Can be Important For Understanding and Treating
Almost All Types Of Relationship Behaviors
(Results for `14,282 University Student Dating Couples)_
Dyadic Type
Any Assault
Severe Assault
Any Injury-Perpetration
Severe Injury-Perpetration
Any Psych Aggression
Severe Psych Aggression
Any Sexual Coercion
Verbal Sexual Coercion
Physical Sexual Coercion
Intransigent
Gender of
Respondent
Female
Female
% Male
Only
9
16
% Female
Only
25
31
% Both
67
53
Female
21.1
13.8
65.1
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
39
9
13
33
44
43
13
10
17
31
10
9
15
9
51
74
55
57
47
43
78
Percentages are similar when based on reports by male students
Is the High Percent of Women Who Assault Self-defense?
Studies on who hit first found it was female partner half the cases
Hamberger, 1997
Bland & Orn ,1986
Straus, 2012
Stets [, 1990 #4608]
DeMaris ,1992
Capaldi [, 2007 #11544]
Gryl, Stith, & Bird ,1991
Saunders ,1986
Fiebert, Gonzalez, 1997
Molidor & Tolman, ,1998
O’Keefe ,1997
77%
73%
61%
58%
49%
46%  the median %41%
40%
32%
30%
21%
9 Studies which asked women whether it was in self-defense:
• Median = 19%, range:5 to 47%
• None of the studies found that a majority of women acted in self-defense
• Almost half of the eleven comparisons found a higher percent of men than
women acting in self-defense
Question 3. What is the relationship between violence in a
relationship and depression and does this vary depending on:
A. Whether the partner was the victim or the
aggressor, or both victim and aggressor?
B. Whether it is the male or female partner?
13
Relation of Dyadic Types Of Partner Violence To Depression
Dating Relationships Of University Students In 15 Nations (N=11,408)
Women
Men
No Violence: Women higher in depression than men
Sole Perpetrator: Male perpetrators higher in depression than female
Sole Victim: Women victims higher in depression than male victims
Both Assault, i.e. both are victims and also perpetrators: Men higher in depression
14
Relation of Dyadic Types Of Partner Violence To Depression
Dating Relationships Of University Students In 15 Nations (N=11,408 )
Women
Men
When men assault, either
as sole perpetrator or both,
male depression higher.
Suggests either depression
as a cause or male guilt, or
both
Women have highest
depression when they are
the sole victims of assault or
both a victim and a
perpetrator
Gender Difference In
link between PV and
depression: Increase in
depression is greater for
men than women , except
when men are the sole
victims
15
Summary
 Both-Assault Dyadic Type
• The most prevalent Dyadic Type of partner violence
• Most closely associated with depression – not surprising
Both most harmful is consistent with other studies,
including studies of harmful effects for children
 Male-Only and Female-Only Dyadic Types
• Also associated with more mental health problems than among
non-violent couples, but less so than the Both Assault DT.
 Comparing the sole perpetrator with being the sole victim
• Men are higher in depression when they are the sole
perpetrators than when they are the sole victims
• Women are higher in depression when they are the sole
victims than when they are the sole perpetrators
What might explain these unexpected result?
16
Question 4 . What is a plausible theory to explain the results?
The difference between men and women in the relation of partner
violence to depression reflects differences in culturally and
biologically based gender roles
Two relevant role differences are Greater saliency and importance of
Status maintenance and enhancement for men
Safety for women
An underlying principle is that threat to central aspects of the self
are associated with an increased probability of depression
• For men, lost of status if their violence becomes known is a
bigger threat than lack of safety when they are victim of
violence by their partner
• For women, lack of safety when they are attacked by their
partner is bigger threat than loss of status if their violence
becomes known.
17
Paper On The Theory In Preparation
• Will explain the basis for believing the assumptions are valid., for
example the link between threat to the self and depression
* Will provide specification of the theoretically based relationships
Winstok and Straus, “Gender Differences In Salience Of Status Enhancement and
Safety In Relationships And Gender Differences In the Link Between Partner
Violence and Depression
18
Q 5 Implications For Theory, Methods, And Practice
Theory
Explanations of the causes or the effects of PV need to take into
account that studies world-wide found that
Male-Only: about 25%
Female-Only: about 25%
Both-Assault: about 50% of couples
Self-defense explains female violence only 10-20% of the time
Method
DTs need to be identify in all research on partner violence
Necessary and practical to obtain data on both partners
Can be done even when only one partner is the research participant
19
Implications (continued)
Practice
Because about half of all partner violence cases are in the “BothAssault” type, including women seeking help from shelters:
• Service providers need to determine which DT applies to a
particular client and why
• Determining the Dyadic type is second only to determining
safety
20
Some References On Dyadic Types
Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Selwyn, C., & Rohling, M. L. (2012). Rates of Bidirectional Versus
Unidirectional Intimate Partner Violence Across Samples, Sexual Orientations, and Race/Ethnicities: A
Comprehensive Review. Partner Abuse, 3(2), 199-230. doi: 10.1891/1946-6560.3.2.199
Straus, M. A., & Michel-Smith, Y. (In press). Mutuality, Severity, And Chronicity Of Violence by FatherOnly, Mother-Only, And Mutually Violent Parents As Reported By University Students In 15 Nations.
Child Abuse and Neglect.
Straus, M. A. (2013, April 25). Dyadic Aggression types: An Extremely simple and extremely powerful tool
for research, Theory, prevention, & treatment of family violence that is practical for use by almost all
researchers and clinicians. Paper presented at the Violence, Conflicts and Unity in Family Context: A
Reappraisal of Therapeutic and Judicial Doctrines, University of Haifa.
Straus, M. A. (1992). Children as witnesses to marital violence: A risk factor for life long problems among
a nationally representative sample of American men and women. In D. F. Schwartz (Ed.), Children and
Violence: Report of the Twenty Third Ross Roundtable on Critical Approaches to Common Pediatric
Problems (pp. 98-109). Columbus, Ohio: Ross Laboratories.
Straus, M. A. (2013). Dyadic Types in the PASK project. Partner Abuse, 4(2).
Other References
Straus, M. A. (2004). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the revised conflict tactics scales: A study of
university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(4), 407-432.
Straus, M. A. (2009). The National context effect: An Empirical test of the validity of Cross-National
research using unrepresentative samples. Cross-Cultural Research, 43(3), 183-205. doi:
10.1177/1069397109335770
21
References On the Conflict Tactics Scales
Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2):
Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), 283-316. doi:
10.1177/019251396017003001
Straus, M. A., & Douglas, E. M. (2004). A short form of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales, and typologies for seventy
and mutuality. Violence and Victims, 19, 507-520.
Straus, M. A. (2004). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the revised conflict tactics scales: A study of university
student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(4), 407-432.
Straus, M. A. (2012). Blaming the messenger for the bad news about partner violence by women: the Methodological,
theoretical, and value basis of the purported invalidity of the Conflict Tactics Scales. Behavioral Sciences & the Law,
30(5), 538-556. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2023
Straus, M. A., & Mickey, E. L. (2012). Reliability, validity, and prevalence of partner violence measured by the conflict
tactics scales in male-dominant nations. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 463-474. doi:
10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.004
22