Test-retest stability of self-reported violence against women measures: results from the stepping stones and creating futures pilot

Extending Johnson's Typology: Additional Manifestations of Dating Violence and Coercive Control

In this study, we explored patterns of violence and coercive control in young adult dating relationships by testing and extending Johnson's typology of intimate partner violence. Young adults (N = 398) between 18 and 27 years old completed an online survey about experiences of violence and coercive control in current and past dating relationships. Using cluster analysis, we classified relationships as no/low coercive control and high coercive control. We then categorized relationship types according to Johnson's typology using the coercive control clusters and the absence/presence of violence. In total, 35% of relationships were abusive (i.e., violent and/or high coercive control), with 24% of all reported relationships including violence with and without high coercive control, and 11% including nonviolent coercive control. Among violent relationships, situational couple violence was more common than other types of dating violence, and two additional types of violence were found: (a) violence toward a nonviolent coercive controlling partner and (b) nonviolent coercive control toward an intimate terrorist, both of which are potentially types of resistance distinct from Johnson's concept of violent resistance. Additionally, victims of intimate terrorism and victims of nonviolent coercive control were significantly more fearful of their partners than victims of situational couple violence, and victims of situational couple violence did not differ in their fear of partners compared to respondents in nonabusive relationships. These findings identify additional abusive relationship types and elucidate the importance of extending Johnson's typology to more comprehensively capture the complex dynamics of coercive control and/or violence in young adult dating relationships.

Longitudinal inconsistencies in women's self-reports of lifetime experience of physical and sexual IPV: evidence from the MAISHA trial and follow-on study in North-western Tanzania

Background

Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is pervasive throughout the world, with profound consequences for women’s health. Research to understand the extent, causes and consequences of IPV relies on self-reported data on violence, and yet there is a paucity of research into the consistency with which women report lifetime IPV over time.

Methods

We use data from the control group of the cluster randomised trial and a follow-on longitudinal study in Tanzania to examine discrepancies in women’s reported experience of lifetime physical IPV and sexual IPV over three time-points (T0, T29, T53 months). Among those reporting lifetime history of IPV at T0, we calculate the proportion who subsequently report no lifetime history at T29 and/or T53 (‘discrepant’ reporting). We use logistic regression to explore associations between discrepant reporting and respondent baseline characteristics, the nature of their IPV experiences at baseline, and situational factors at T53.

Results

Complete IPV data were available for 301 women. At T0, 154 (51%) women reported lifetime history of physical IPV, of whom 62% gave a discrepant ‘never’ report in a subsequent round. Among 93 (31%) with lifetime history of sexual IPV at T0, 73% provided a subsequent discrepant report. 73% of women reported lifetime physical IPV, and 55% lifetime sexual IPV in at least one survey round. For both IPV outcomes, women were less likely to provide discrepant reports if they had recent IPV at baseline, poor mental health (T53) and poor communication with partner (T53). For physical IPV only, reduced discrepant reporting was also associated with baseline household-level financial hardship and more severe or extensive experience of IPV.

Conclusions

A large proportion of women provided discrepant reports over the course of the study. Prevalence estimates of lifetime IPV from one-off cross-sectional surveys are likely to be underestimates, biased towards more recent and severe cases. To improve the stability of IPV measures, researchers should explicitly clarify the meaning of reference periods such as ‘ever’, consider using shorter reference periods (e.g. past-year), and avoid filter questions that use positive reports of lifetime IPV as a gateway to asking about more recent experiences.

Trial registration: Maisha CRT01 registered at ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02592252, registered retrospectively (13/08/2015).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12905-022-01697-y.

The Global Prevalence of Sexual Assault: A Systematic Review of International Research Since 2010

OBJECTIVE

We present a review of peer-reviewed English-language studies conducted outside the United States and Canada on the prevalence of sexual assault victimization in adolescence and adulthood published since 2010.

METHOD

A systematic literature search yielded 32 articles reporting on 45 studies from 29 countries. Studies that only provided prevalence estimates for sexual assault in intimate relationships or did not present separate rates for men and women were excluded. All studies were coded by two coders, and a risk of bias score was calculated for each study. Both past-year and prevalence rates covering longer periods were extracted.

RESULTS

The largest number of studies came from Europe (n=21), followed by Africa (n=11), Asia and Latin America (n=6 each). One study came from the Middle East and no studies were found from Oceania. Across the 22 studies that reported past-year prevalence rates, figures ranged from 0% to 59.2% for women, 0.3% to 55.5% for men, and 1.5% to 18.2% for LGBT samples. The average risk of bias score was 5.7 out of 10. Studies varied widely in methodology.

CONCLUSION

Despite regional variation, most studies indicate that sexual assault is widespread. More sustained, systematic, and coordinated research efforts are needed to gauge the scale of sexual assault in different parts of the world and to develop prevention measures.

What can we learn from studying control arms of randomised VAW prevention intervention evaluations: reflections on expected measurement error, meaningful change and the utility of RCTs

Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are a gold standard for evaluations in public health, economics and social sciences, including prevention of violence against women (VAW). They substantially reduce bias, but do not eliminate measurement error. Control arms often show change, but this is rarely systematically examined.Objective: We present a secondary analysis of data from the control arms of evaluations of VAW prevention programming to understand measurement variance over time, factors that may systematically impact this and make recommendations for stronger trial design and interpretation.Methods: We examine data from six RCTs and one quasi-experimental study, all of which used comparable measures. We look at change over time among control participants in prevalence of physical intimate partner violence (IPV), sexual IPV, and severe physical/sexual IPV, by participants' gender and study design (cohort vs. repeat cross-sectional).Results: On average, repeated assessments of past year IPV varied by 3.21 (95%Cis 1.59,4.83) percentage points for the studies with no active control arms. The prevalence at endline, as a proportion of that at baseline, on average differed by 17.7%. In 10/35 assessments from 4/7 studies, the difference was more than 30%. We did not find evidence of the Hawthorne effect or repeat interview bias as explanations. Our findings largely supported non-differential misclassification (measurement error) as the most likely error and it was a greater problem for men.Conclusions: Control arms are very valuable, but in VAW research their measures fluctuate. This must be considered in sample size calculations. We need more rigorous criteria for determining trial effect. Our findings suggest this may be an absolute change in prevalence of 7% and proportionate change of 0.4 or more (especially for studies in populations with lower IPV prevalence (<20%)). More elaborate pre-defined outcomes are necessary for determining impact (or possible harms) of VAW prevention interventions.