ArticleBMJ open2020
Individual and societal risk factors of attitudes justifying intimate partner violence against women: a multilevel cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shadow pandemics: violence and vulnerability as part of the COVID-19 experience in Sub-Saharan Africa.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- A Global Examination on the Attitudes Toward Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: A Multilevel Modeling Analysis.Violence against women · 2026Article
- Factors Influencing Attitudes Toward Intimate Partner Violence Among Married Women: A Multilevel Analysis Across 20 Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Violence against women · 2026Article
- Experience of controlling behaviour and intimate partner violence among women of reproductive age in sub-Saharan Africa.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Women's attitudes towards physical intimate partner violence in India: Trends, patterns, and determinants.PloS one · 2025Article
- Justification of physical intimate partner violence among married men in East Africa evidence from the recent demographic and health survey (2015-2022): a multilevel analysis.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Article
- Association Between Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and Women's Attitudes Toward Intimate Partner Violence: Evidence from Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2017-2018.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Women's Attitudes Toward Intimate Partner Violence in Low- and Middle-Income Countries of Southern Asia.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2024Article
- Measuring Violence Behaviours in the Context of Romantic Relationships during Adolescence: New Evidence about the Modified Conflict Tactics Scale.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Evaluating Community Factors Associated With Individually Held Intimate Partner Violence Beliefs Across 51 Countries.Journal of interpersonal violence · 2022Article
- Development and Psychometric Assessment of a Questionnaire for the Detection of Invisible Violence against Women.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- From Endorsement of Ambivalent Sexism to Psychological IPV Victimization: The Role of Attitudes Supportive of IPV, Legitimating Myths of IPV, and Acceptance of Psychological Aggression.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Article
- Attitudes towards Violence in Adolescents and Youth Intimate Partner Relationships: Validation of the Spanish Version of the EAV.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- An examination of physical violence against women and its justification in development settings in Uganda.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAttitudes justifying intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) can play an essential role in explaining the prevalence of such public health problem. The study aim was to explain attitudes justifying IPVAW identifying individual and societal risk factors. DESIGN AND
settingA multilevel cross-sectional study of the World Values Survey (WVS) in 54 global countries.
participantsA representative transnational community-based sample of 81 516 participants (47.8% male, 52.1% female), aged mean of 42.41. MEASURES: Attitudes justifying IPVAW, sociodemographic, sexism, self-transcendence and conservation values were measured using questions from WVS. Country and regional gender inequality were assessed by Gender Inequality Index.
resultsAround 16% (intraclass correlation=0.16) of individual differences in attitudes justifying IPVAW are explained by countries. Statistically significant predictors at individual and country level were: sex (B=-0.24, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.22), age (B=-0.08 to -0.25, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.03), marital status (B=0.09 to 0.23, 95% CI 0.002 to 0.33), educational level (B=-0.10 to -0.14, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.04), self-transcendence values (B=-0.10, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.12), sexism (B=0.21, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.28), country (B=2.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.26) and regional (B=2.23, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.42) gender inequality. Country gender inequality (B=-0.18, p=0.12) and regional gender inequality (B=-0.21, p=0.10) did not moderate the associations between self-transcendence values and attitudes justifying IPVAW. In the same way for sexism, data did not provide support for a moderating role of country gender inequality (B=0.22, p=0.26) and regional gender inequality (B=0.10, p=0.66).
conclusionsIndividual and country predictors accounted for differences in attitudes justifying IPVAW. However, neither gender inequality of country nor gender inequality of region interacted with sexism and self-transcendence values. Theoretical and methodological implications are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.