The 131st Annual Meeting (November 15-19, 2003) of APHA

Abstract #62084

Catherine A. Taylor, MSW, MPH, School of Public Health, Dept. of Community Health Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, 650 C.E. Young Drive South, Box 951772, Violence Prevention Research Group, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1772, (310) 825-8749, cat28@cornell.edu and Susan B. Sorenson, PhD, School of Public Health, Community Health Sciences Dept, University of California Los Angeles, Box 951772, Violence Prevention Research Group, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1772.

Purpose: To assess, compare, and contrast injunctive social norms regarding personal fault for intimate partner violence (IPV) and responsibility for subsequent action. Methods: Roughly equal numbers of Black, Hispanic, Korean American, Vietnamese American, Other Asian American, and white respondents participated in a 27-minute interview (n=3,679). An experimental vignette design was used to test for associations between contextual factors of IPV, respondent characteristics, and normative beliefs about fault and responsibility for IPV. After each vignette, respondents were asked whom they thought was most at fault and who should take responsibility for action. Multinomial regressions were conducted for each question, controlling for all vignette variables and all assessed respondent characteristics simultaneously. Results: In 69% of the cases, respondents thought the assailant was primarily at fault for the behavior; however, fault was attributed to both persons 23% of the time. In contrast, respondents thought the assailant alone should do something about the situation in only 13% of the cases, both should do something in 52% of the cases and the victim alone should do something in 31% of the cases. Beliefs were influenced by victim and assailant gender and sexual orientation, as well as by six situational factors. Conclusions: Normative beliefs about blame and responsibility for action for IPV do not always align; although blame was placed mostly on assailants, victims were held either mutually or primarily responsible for taking action in 83% of the cases. Findings may inform policy and public educational efforts to alter social norms regarding IPV intervention.

Learning Objectives:

• Describe at least two reasons why the examination of informal social norms may be important in the prevention of intimate partner violence (IPV).
• Describe the general discrepancy between normative beliefs about blame and taking responsibility for intimate partner violence.
• List up to five contextual variables associated with beliefs about blame and responsibility for IPV.

Keywords: Violence Prevention, Domestic Violence

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.