Cross-Cultural Differences in Physical Aggression Between Partners: A Social-Role Analysis

Alcohol preference in mice lacking the Avpr1a vasopressin receptor

[Arg(8)]-vasopressin (Avp), a nonapeptide hormone, is known to regulate blood pressure, water balance, and a variety of behaviors such as anxiety, aggression, and bonding. Although some evidence that Avp modifies ethanol consumption and some of the effects of ethanol on behavior have been reported, the role of Avp in alcohol consumption and preference is poorly understood. The Avp1a receptor (Avpr1a) is ubiquitously expressed in the central nervous system. To determine the role of Avp signaling on the behavioral effects of alcohol, we examined voluntary ethanol consumption in mice with targeted disruptions of the Avpr1a knockout (Avpr1a KO) gene. Avpr1a KO mice displayed both increased ethanol consumption and preference compared with wild-type (WT) mice. Enhanced ethanol consumption was dramatically and reversibly reduced by treatment with N-methyl-D-aspartic acid antagonists. Basal glutamate release was elevated around the striatum in Avpr1a KO mice. Elevation of extracellular glutamate was also produced in WT mice by local application of an Avpr1a antagonist though a dialysis probe, and this elevation was quickly reversed by stopping the perfusion. These results suggest that Avp can inhibit the release of glutamate from the presynaptic terminal via the Avp1a receptor and that elevation of glutamate levels owing to loss of the inhibitory effect via Avp-Avpr1a signaling may play an important role in the preference for ethanol.

Impelling and Inhibiting Forces in the Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence

The huge corpus of research identifying risk factors for intimate partner violence (IPV) has outpaced theoretical models explaining how these risk factors combine to exert their effects. This report presents a 2-stage process model investigating how a previously nonviolent interaction between intimate partners escalates to IPV. The first stage examines whether at least one partner experiences strong violence-impelling forces, which lead the individual to experience action tendencies toward IPV. The second examines whether the partner experiencing violence-impelling forces suffers from weak violence-inhibiting forces, which would otherwise serve to override such action tendencies. This model extends previous research by emphasizing the importance of inhibitory processes in IPV and by imposing a new conceptual structure on the identified IPV risk factors.

Prevalence of intimate partner violence: findings from the WHO multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence

BACKGROUND

Violence against women is a serious human rights abuse and public health issue. Despite growing evidence of the size of the problem, current evidence comes largely from industrialised settings, and methodological differences limit the extent to which comparisons can be made between studies. We aimed to estimate the extent of physical and sexual intimate partner violence against women in 15 sites in ten countries: Bangladesh, Brazil, Ethiopia, Japan, Namibia, Peru, Samoa, Serbia and Montenegro, Thailand, and the United Republic of Tanzania.

METHODS

Standardised population-based household surveys were done between 2000 and 2003. Women aged 15-49 years were interviewed and those who had ever had a male partner were asked in private about their experiences of physically and sexually violent and emotionally abusive acts.

FINDINGS

24,097 women completed interviews, with around 1500 interviews per site. The reported lifetime prevalence of physical or sexual partner violence, or both, varied from 15% to 71%, with two sites having a prevalence of less than 25%, seven between 25% and 50%, and six between 50% and 75%. Between 4% and 54% of respondents reported physical or sexual partner violence, or both, in the past year. Men who were more controlling were more likely to be violent against their partners. In all but one setting women were at far greater risk of physical or sexual violence by a partner than from violence by other people.

INTERPRETATION

The findings confirm that physical and sexual partner violence against women is widespread. The variation in prevalence within and between settings highlights that this violence in not inevitable, and must be addressed.