Abstract
In lower-income settings, women more often than men justify intimate partner violence (IPV). Yet, the role of measurement invariance across gender is unstudied. We developed the ATT-IPV scale to measure attitudes about physical violence against wives in 1,055 married men and women ages 18–50 in My Hao district, Vietnam. Across 10 items about transgressions of the wife, women more often than men agreed that a man had good reason to hit his wife (3 % to 92 %; 0 % to 67 %). In random split-half samples, one-factor exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (N 1 = 527) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (N 2 = 528) models for nine items with sufficient variability had significant loadings (0.575–0.883; 0.502–0.897) and good fit (RMSEA = 0.068, 0.048; CFI = 0.951, 0.978, TLI = 0.935, 0.970). Three items had significant uniform differential item functioning (DIF) by gender, and adjustment for DIF revealed that measurement noninvariance was partially masking men’s lower propensity than women to justify IPV. A CFA model for the six items without DIF had excellent fit (RMSEA = 0.019, CFI = 0.994, TLI = 0.991) and an attitudinal gender gap similar to the DIF-adjusted nine-item model, suggesting that the six-item scale reliably measures attitudes about IPV across gender. Researchers should validate the scale in urban Vietnam and elsewhere and decompose DIF-adjusted gender attitudinal gaps.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Variations include hitting only; beating only; and in one case, hitting, beating, kicking, or pushing.
Wording variations are do you agree or disagree with, are you in agreement with, is it normal that, is it okay for, is it legitimate that, and does a husband have a right to.
The 2006 MICS translation of this question was, “In your opinion, do you find acceptable for the husband to hit or beat his wife in the following situations [. . .]? Our translation includes only “beat” because only one word was included in Vietnamese (Đánh).
The 2010–2011 MICS translation was, “In your opinion, is a husband justified in hitting or beating his wife in the following situations: . . .”
The translation in the survey report was, “In your opinion, does a man have a good reason to hit his wife if: . . .”
One man aged 51 years at the time of interview was included in the sample.
“Don’t know” responses were coded as missing. Across all 10 items, 0–10 responses were missing.
For 20 demographic attributes, including age, completed grades of schooling, and household wealth, we found no significant differences between the random split-half subsamples (p ≤ .05).
See Yount et al. (2014) for a similar analysis with other attitudinal items regarding women’s recourse after exposure to IPV.
References
Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2010). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The reviewers guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 93–114). New York, NY: Routledge.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Bryant, S. A., & Spencer, G. A. (2003). University students’ attitudes about attributing blame in domestic violence. Journal of Family Violence, 18, 369–376.
Cauffman, E., & MacIntosh, R. (2006). A Rasch differential item functioning analysis of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument: Identifying race and gender differential item functioning among juvenile offenders. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 502–521.
Central Statistical Office (Zimbabwe) and Macro International Inc. (2000). Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey 1999. Calverton, MD: Central Statistical Office and Macro International Inc.
Edelen, M. O., McCaffrey, D. F., Marshall, G. N., & Jaycox, L. H. (2009). Measurement of teen dating violence attitudes: An item response theory evaluation of differential item functioning according to gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 1243–1263.
EI-Zanaty, F., Hussein, E. M., Shawky, G. A., Way, A. A., & Kishor, S. (1996). Egypt Demographic and Health Survey 1995. Calverton, MD: National Population Council (Egypt) and Macro International Inc.
Fletcher, R., & Hattie, J. (2005). Gender differences in physical self-concept: A multidimensional differential item functioning analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 657–667.
Garcia-Moreno, C., & Stöckl, H. (2009). Protection of sexual and reproductive health rights: Addressing violence against women. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 106, 144–147.
Garcia-Moreno, C., Jansen, H. A. F. M., Ellsberg, M., Heise, L., & Watts, C. H., on behalf of the WHO Multi-country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence Against Women Study Team. (2006). Prevalence of intimate partner violence: Findings from the WHO Multi-country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence. Lancet, 368, 1260–1269.
Gelin, M. N., & Zumbo, B. D. (2003). Differential item functioning results may change depending on how an item is scored: An illustration with the center for epidemiologic studies depression scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 65–74.
Gender and Community Development Network (GENCOMNET). (2011). Evaluate the implementation of law on domestic violence prevention and control in Vietnam. Hanoi, Vietnam: GENCOMNET.
General Statistics Office (GSO). (2006). Viet Nam Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2006, final report. Hanoi, Vietnam: GSO.
General Statistics Office (GSO). (2010). “Keeping silent is dying”: Results from the National Study on Domestic Violence Against Women in Vietnam. Hanoi, Vietnam: GSO.
General Statistics Office (GSO). (2011). Viet Nam Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2011, final report. Hanoi, Vietnam: GSO.
Ghuman, S. J., Lee, H. J., & Smith, H. L. (2006). Measurement of women’s autonomy according to women and their husbands: Results from five Asian countries. Social Science Research, 35, 1–28.
Grice, J. W. (2001). Computing and evaluating factor scores. Psychological Methods, 6, 430–450.
Harrington, D. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Higgins, E., Zureick-Brown, S., VanderEnde, K. E., Hoang, T. A., Tran, H. M., Schuler, S. R., & Yount, K. M. (2013). Determinants of men’s perpetration of intimate partner violence in Vietnam: An observational study. Unpublished manuscript.
Hoang, T. A., Minh, T. H., Duc, N. M., Mai, B. T. T., Thien, P. V., Vu, S. H., & Santillán, D. (2002). Impact of the Cairo Programme of Action on gender, women’s empowerment and reproductive health in four Vietnamese communities. Hanoi, Vietnam: Medical Publishing House.
Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Holleman, B. (1999). The nature of the forbid/allow asymmetry: Two correlational studies. Sociological Methods & Research, 28, 209–244.
Horton, P., & Rydstrøm, H. (2011). Heterosexual masculinity in contemporary Vietnam: Privileges, pleasures, and protests. Men and Masculinities, 14, 542–564.
International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) & ORC Macro. (2000). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-2), 1998–99: India. Mumbai, India: IIPS.
Johnson, I. M., & Sigler, R. T. (2000). Public perceptions: Stability of the public’s endorsements of the definition and criminalization of the abuse of women. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 165–179.
Kandiyoti, D. (1988). Bargaining with patriarchy. Gender and Society, 2, 274–290.
Khiet, H. (2000, June). Women in 2000: Gender equality, development and peace for the 21st century. Speech at the UN General Assembly’s 23rd Special Session, New York, NY.
Khuat, T. H., Le, B. D., & Huong, N. N. (2010). Easy to joke about, but hard to talk about: Sexuality in contemporary Vietnam. Hanoi, Vietnam: World Publishing House.
Kishor, S., & Johnson, K. (2004). Profiling domestic violence: A multicountry study. Calverton, MD: ORC Macro.
Knodel, J., Vu, M. L., Jayakody, R., & Vu, T. H. (2005). Gender roles in the family: Change and stability in Vietnam. Asian Population Studies, 1, 69–92.
Komter, A. (1989). Hidden power in marriage. Gender and Society, 3, 187–216.
Lan, A. H., & Yeoh, B. S. A. (2011). Breadwinning wives and “left-behind” husbands: Men and masculinities in the Vietnamese transnational family. Gender & Society, 25, 717–739.
Locke, L. M., & Richman, C. L. (1999). Attitudes toward domestic violence: Race and gender issues. Sex Roles, 49, 227–247.
Mellenbergh, G. J. (1989). Item bias and item response theory. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 127–143.
Merry, S. A. (1995). Resistance and the cultural power of law. Law and Society Review, 29, 11–26.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
National Assembly, Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (NAGSRV). (2007). Law on Domestic Violence Prevention and Control (Law No. 02/2007/QH12).
Nguyen, D. V., Ostergren, P.–O., & Krantz, G. (2008). Intimate partner violence against women in rural Vietnam—Different socio-demographic factors are associated with different forms of violence: Need for new intervention guidelines? BMC Public Health, 8, 55. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-8-55
Nguyen, D. V., Ostergren, P.–O., & Krantz, G. (2009). Intimate partner violence against women, health effects and health care seeking in rural Vietnam. European Journal of Public Health, 19, 178–182.
Nguyen, T. H. (2012). Rape disclosure: The interplay of gender, culture and kinship in contemporary Vietnam. Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care, 14(Suppl. 1), S39–S52.
Nguyen, T. P. T., Khuat, T. H., & Le, B. D. (2011). “A real man must be active, a real woman must be submissive”: The discourse of sexuality in today’s Vietnam. Culture, Health and Sexuality, 13(Suppl. 1), S22–S23.
Phan, T. T. H. (2008). Sexual coercion within marriage in Quang Tri, Vietnam. Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care, 10(Suppl. 1), S177–S187.
Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 552–566.
Rydstrøm, H. (2003). Encountering “hot” anger: Domestic violence in contemporary Vietnam. Violence Against Women, 9, 676–697.
Saltzman, L. E., Fanslow, J. L., McMahon, P. M., & Shelley, G. A. (2002). Intimate partner violence surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended data elements, version 1.0. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
Schuler, S. R., Hoang, T. A., Vu, S. H., Tran, H. M., Bui, T. T. M., & Pham, V. T. (2006). Constructions of gender in Vietnam: In pursuit of the “three criteria.” Culture, Health & Sexuality, 8, 383–394.
Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1996). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Smith, H. L., Gager, C. T., & Morgan, S. P. (1998). Identifying underlying dimensions in spouses’ evaluations of fairness in the division of household labor. Social Science Research, 27, 305–327.
Thanh, C. B., Markham, C. M., Ross, M. W., Williams, M. L., Beasley, R. P., Ly, T. H. T., & Thach, N. L. (2012). Dimensions of gender relations and reproductive health inequity perceived by female undergraduate students in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam: A qualitative exploration. International Journal for Equity in Health, 63, 1–11.
Tourangeau, R., Singer, E., & Presser, S. (2003). Context effects in attitude surveys: Effects on remote items and impact on predictive validity. Sociological Methods & Research, 31, 486–513.
United Nations General Assembly. (2006). The Secretary-General’s in-depth study on all forms of violence against women. (A/61/122/Add.1).
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). (2012). Domestic violence prevention and response in Vietnam: Lessons learned from the intervention model in Phu Tho and Ben Tre Provinces. Hanoi, Vietnam: UNFPA.
Uthman, O. A., Lawoko, S., & Moradi, T. (2010). Sex disparities in attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women in sub-Saharan Africa: A socioecological analysis. BMC Public Health, 10, 1–8. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-223
Wekerle, C., & Wolfe, D. A. (1999). Dating violence in mid-adolescence: Theory, significance, and emerging prevention initiatives. Clinical Psychology Review, 19, 435–456.
Weldon, S. L. (2002). Protest, policy, and the problem of violence against women: A cross-national comparison. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburg Press.
Werner, J. (2009). Gender, household and state in post-revolutionary Vietnam. New York, NY: Routledge.
World Bank. (2011). Vietnam country gender assessment. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2012). Well begun, not yet done: Vietnam’s remarkable progress on poverty reduction and the emerging challenges. Hanoi, Vietnam: World Bank.
World Bank. (2013). World DataBank gender statistics. Retrieved from http://databank.worldbank.org/data/views/reports/tableview.aspx
World Health Organization (WHO). (2001). Putting women first: Ethical and safety recommendations for research on domestic violence against women. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.
World Values Survey Association. (2013). World Values Survey databank. Retrieved from http://www.wvsevsdb.com/wvs/WVSAnalizeQuestion.jsp
Yodanis, C. L. (2004). Gender inequality, violence against women, and fear: A cross-national test of the feminist theory of violence against women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 655–675.
Yount, K. M. (2011). Women’s conformity as resistance to intimate partner violence in Assiut, Egypt. Sex Roles, 64, 43–58.
Yount, K. M., & Carrera, J. S. (2006). Domestic violence against married women in Cambodia. Social Forces, 85, 355–387.
Yount, K. M., DiGirolamo, A., & Ramakrishnan, U. (2011a). Impacts of domestic violence on child growth and nutrition: A conceptual review of the pathways of influence. Social Science & Medicine, 72, 1534–1554.
Yount, K. M., Halim, N., Head, S., & Schuler, S. R. (2012). A survey experiment of women’s attitudes about intimate partner violence against women in rural Bangladesh. Demography, 50, 333–357.
Yount, K. M., Halim, N., Hynes, M., & Hillman, E. (2011b). Response effects to attitudinal questions about domestic violence against women: A comparative perspective. Social Science Research, 40, 873–884.
Yount, K. M., & Li, L. (2009). Women’s “justification” of domestic violence in Egypt. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 1125–1140.
Yount, K. M., & Li, L. (2012). Spousal disagreement in reporting of physical violence against wives in Southern Egypt. Journal of Family Issues, 33, 1540–1563.
Yount, K. M., VanderEnde, K. E., Schuler, S. R., & Hoang, T. A. (2013). Women’s attitudes about recourse after intimate partner violence in Vietnam. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Yount, K. M., VanderEnde, K. E., Zureick-Brown, S., Minh, T. H., Schuler, S. R., & Hoang, T. A. (2014). Measuring attitudes about women’s recourse after exposure to intimate partner violence: The ATT-RECOURSE scale. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29, 1579–1605.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by NIH research Grant 5R21HD067834-01/02 (PIs Yount and Schuler) and the Hubert Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University. The article was written while Dr. Sarah Zureick-Brown was a postdoctoral fellow in the Hubert Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University. The authors thank anonymous reviewers for their comments on a prior version of this article. The authors also thank Vu Song Ha, Quach Trang, the entire field staff, and all participants for their time, effort, and dedication to this project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yount, K.M., VanderEnde, K., Zureick-Brown, S. et al. Measuring Attitudes About Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: The ATT-IPV Scale. Demography 51, 1551–1572 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-014-0297-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-014-0297-6