Journal of Family Violence

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 347–356 | Cite as

Prevalence of spouse aggression in Hong Kong

  • Catherine So-kum Tang
Article

Abstract

The present study explored the extent of spouse aggression in Chinese families in Hong Kong. Subjects were 246 female and 136 male undergraduate students who reported on the various forms of interparental aggression and violence. About 75% of the subjects reported interparental verbal or symbolic aggression and 14% indicated the use of physical violence between parents. In general, compared to mothers, fathers engaged in more verbal aggression against their spouses. Mothers were as likely as fathers to use actual physical force toward their spouses. Interparental responses to family conflicts did not vary with children's gender except that female subjects observed that fathers reasoned less but engaged in more insulting, throwing, smashing, hitting, or kicking things than mothers.

Key words

spouse aggression Hong Kong families prevalence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baling, J., O'Leary, K. D., Jouriles, E. N., Vivian, D., and MacEwen, K. E. (1987). Factor similarity of the Conflict Tactics Scale across samples, spouses, and sites: Issues and implications.J. Fam. Viol. 2: 37–53.Google Scholar
  2. Breslin, F. C., Riggs, D. S., O'Leary, K. D., and Arias, I. (1990). Family precursors: Expected and actual consequences of dating aggression.J. Interpen. Viol. 5: 247–256.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, J. C. (1992). Wife-battering: Cultural contexts versus western social sciences. In Counts, A. C., Brown, J. K., and Campbell, J. C. (eds.),Sanctions and Sanctuary: Cultural Perspectives on the Beating of Wives, Westview Press, Boulder, pp. 229–249.Google Scholar
  4. Chen, R. (1991). Relationship between marital violence characteristics and family dynamics in Taiwan: A study of 25 cases. In Cheung, F. M., Wan, P. W., Choi, H. K., and Choy, L. M. (eds.),Selected Papers on Conference on Gender Studies in Chinese Societies, Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, Hong Kong, pp. 279–303.Google Scholar
  5. Finkelhor, D., Hotaling, G. T., and Yllo, K. (1989).Stopping Family Violence; Research; Priorities for the Coming Decade, Sage, CA.Google Scholar
  6. Gallin, R. (1992). Wife abuse in the context of development and change: A Chinese (Taiwanese) case. In Counts, D. A., Brown, J. K., and Campbell, J. C. (eds.),Sanctions and Sanctuary: Cultural Perspectives on the Beating of Wives, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp. 119–227.Google Scholar
  7. Gully, K. J., Pepping, J., and Dengerink, H. A. (1982). Gender differences in third-party reports of violence.J. Marr. Fam. 44: 497–498.Google Scholar
  8. Harmony House (1991).Annu. Rep. 1990–1991, Harmony House, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  9. Honig, E., and Hershatter, G. (1988). Violence against women. In Honig, E., and Hershatter, G. (eds.),Personal Voice, pp. 273–307.Google Scholar
  10. Jouriles, E. N., and Lecompte, S. H. (1991). Husband's aggression toward wives and mothers' and fathers' aggression toward children: Moderating effects of child gender.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 59: 190–192.Google Scholar
  11. Levinson, D. (1989).Family Violence in a Cross-Cultural Perspective, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
  12. Miller, J. L. (1991). Family violence research: Some basic and applied questions. In Knudsen, D. D., and Miller, J. L. (eds.),Abused and Battered: Social and Legal Responses to Family Violence, Aldine de Gruyter, New York, pp. 5–47.Google Scholar
  13. O'Leary, K. D., and Arias, I. (1988). Assessing agreement of reports of spouse abuse. In Hotaling, G. T., Finkelhor, D., Kilpatrick, T. T., and Straus, M. A. (eds.),New Directions in Family Violence Research, Sage, CA, pp. 218–227.Google Scholar
  14. Pagelow, M. (1981). Factors affecting women's decisions to leave violent relationships.J. Fam. Issues 2: 391–414.Google Scholar
  15. Saunders, D. G. (1988). Wife abuse, husband abuse, or mutual combat? A feminist perspective on the empirical findings. In Yllo, K., and Bograd, M. (eds.),Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, Sage, CA, pp. 9–0113.Google Scholar
  16. Straus, M. A (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: conflict tactics (CT) scales.J. Marr. Fam. 75–88.Google Scholar
  17. Straus, M. A. (1980). Victims and aggressors in marital violence.Am. Behav. Scientist 23: 681–704.Google Scholar
  18. Straus, M. A. (1989).Assaults by Wives on Husbands: Implications for Primary Prevention, Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Chicago.Google Scholar
  19. Straus, M. A., and Gelles, R. J. (1986). Societal change and change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys.J. Ma. Fam. 48: 465–479.Google Scholar
  20. Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., and Steinmetz, S. K. (1980).Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family, Anchor Books, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Tang, C. (1989). Sexual assault and physical violence against women. In Jaschok, M. (ed.),How History Becomes Nature: An Inquiry into Our History as Women in Hong Kong, Centre for Asian Studies, Hong Kong, pp. 27–30.Google Scholar
  22. Tang, C., Critelli, J. W., and Porter, J. (1993). Motives in sexual aggression: The Chinese context.J. Interpers. Viol. 8(4): 435–445.Google Scholar
  23. The Global Fund for Women & Shaler Adams Foundation (1992).Ending violence against women: A resource guide, The Global Fund for Women, CA.Google Scholar
  24. Walker, L. E. (1984).The battered woman syndrome, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Walker, L. E. (1989). Psychology and violence against women.Am. Psychologist 44: 695–702.Google Scholar
  26. Yeung, C. (1991). Wife abuse: A brief historical review on research and intervention.Hong Kong J. Social Work 25: 29–36.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catherine So-kum Tang
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentChinese University of Hong KongShatin NTHong Kong

Personalised recommendations