Journal of Urban Health

, Volume 88, Issue 2, pp 240–253 | Cite as

Women’s Perceptions of Their Community’s Social Norms Towards Assisting Women Who Have Experienced Intimate Partner Violence

  • Karen Ann McDonnellEmail author
  • Jessica G. Burke
  • Andrea C. Gielen
  • Patricia O’Campo
  • Meghan Weidl


The role of social norms has played an often unrecognized role in the perception of and action to assist low-income urban women who are in violent relationships. Two forms of social norms will be assessed, including descriptive norms—what people typically do to assist women in a violent relationship—and injunctive norms—defined as what people should do to assist women. This study will present our initial findings into the development of measures to assess women’s perception of their community’s social norms toward assisting women who have experienced intimate partner violence (IPV) and how these norms are related to women’s perception of the community, reasons for community assistance toward women experiencing IPV, and women’s own experience of IPV. Systematic measurement development processes were applied to reliably and validly develop the social norms measures. A three-phase approach was used to develop eight paired items measuring descriptive and injunctive norms. A total of 176 low-income urban women were interviewed and the scale responses were compared to length of time at the residence, perceptions of their neighborhood, perceived reasons for community involvement and non-involvement in assisting women experiencing IPV, and IPV experienced as an adult. The two developed social norms scales were found to have high internal consistency alpha coefficients of 0.84 for descriptive norms and 0.93 for injunctive norms. Paired t tests were statistically significant, denoting higher injunctive than descriptive social norms. Lowered descriptive norms were found among younger women, women who reported that they did not think their neighborhood was a good place to live, women who had ever experienced intimate partner violence as an adult, and perceived lower reasons for neighbor involvement and higher reasons for neighbor non-involvement toward assisting women experiencing IPV. Higher levels of injunctive social norms were statistically associated with living in a good place and increased perceived reasons for neighbor involvement toward assisting women experiencing IPV. Significant differences between descriptive and injunctive norms suggest that women, especially those who are currently experiencing IPV, would prefer greater support from community neighbors than they are currently providing. The descriptive and injunctive social norms scales demonstrated a high level of internal reliability and significantly associated with other influencing factors thought to be associated with social norms. Overall, the performance of the injunctive and descriptive norms scales support their use as a tool to investigate social norms toward neighbors taking action to assist women experiencing IPV.


Social norms Intimate partner violence Urban Women 


  1. 1.
    Johnson C. Domestic violence: the cost to society, the challenge to development. Gender Action. 1997; 1(4): 2–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    García-Moreno C, Jansen HAFM, Ellsberg M, Heise L, Watts CH. Prevalence of intimate partner violence: findings from the WHO Multi-country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence. Lancet. 2006; 368(9543): 1260–1269.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    García-Moreno C, Jansen HAFM, Ellsberg M, Heise L, Watts CH. WHO Multi-country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence Against Women. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Adverse health conditions and health risk behaviors associated with intimate partner violence—United States 2005. MMWR. 2008; 57(5): 113–117.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones AS, Gielen AC, Campbell JC et al. Annual and lifetime prevalence of partner abuse in a sample of female HMO enrollees. Women’s Health Issues. 1999; 9(6): 295–305.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coker AL, Derrick C, Lumpkin JL, Aldrich TE, Oldendick R. Help-seeking for intimate partner violence and forced sex in South Carolina. Am J Prev Med. 2000; 19(4): 316–320.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tjaden P, Thoennes N. Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, Research Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, NCJ 181867; 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    O’Campo P, McDonnell KA, Gielen AC, Burke JG, Chen Y. Surviving physical and sexual abuse: what helps low-income women? Patient Educ Couns. 2002; 46: 205–212.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ansara DL, Hindin MJ. Formal and informal help-seeking associated with women’s and men’s experience of intimate partner violence in Canada. Social Science and Medicine. 2010; 70: 1011–1018.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liang B, Goodman L, Tummala-Narra P, Weintraub S. A theoretical framework for understanding help-seeking processes among survivors of intimate partner violence. Am J Community Psychol. 2005; 36(1–2): 71–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. National Survey on Community Attitudes Towards Violence Against Women 2009: Changing Cultures, Changing Attitudes—Preventing Violence Against Women. A Summary of Findings. Australian Government Publications; March 10, 2010. Available at:∼/media/ResourceCentre/PublicationsandResources/NCAS_CommunityAttitudes_report_2010.ashx. Accessed November 10, 2010.
  12. 12.
    Neighbors C, Walker DD, Mbilinyi LF et al. Normative misperceptions of abuse among perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women. 2010; 16(4): 370–386.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lewis MJ, West B, Bautista L, Greenberg AM, Done-Perez I. Perceptions of service providers and community members on intimate partner violence within a Latino community. Health Educ Behav. 2005; 32: 69–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    World Health Organization. Violence by intimate partners. In: Krug EG, Dahlberg LL, Mercy JA, Zwi AB, Lozano R, eds. World Report in Violence and Health, 2002. World Health Organization; 2003.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Raj A, Silverman JG. Violence against immigrant women: the roles of culture, context and legal immigrant status on intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women. 2002; 8(3): 367–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salazar LF, Baker CK, Price AW, Carlin K. Moving beyond the individual: examining the effects of domestic violence policies on social norms. Am J Community Psychol. 2003; 32(3–4): 253–264.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor CA, Sorenson SB. Injunctive social norms of adults regarding teen dating violence. J Adolesc Health. 2004; 34: 468–479.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taylor CA, Sorenson SB. Community-based norms about IPV: putting attributions of fault and responsibility into context. Sex Roles. 2005; 53(7/8): 573–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nayak MB, Byrne CA, Martin M, Abraham AG. Attitudes towards violence against women: a cross-nation study. Sex Roles. 2003; 49(7–8): 333–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Usdin S, Scheepers E, Goldsein S, Japhet G. Achieving social change on gender-based violence: a report on the impact of Soul City’s fourth series. Soc Sci Med. 2005; 61: 2434–2445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Coker AL, Smith PH, Thompson MP, McKeown RE, Bethea L, Davis KE. Social support protects against the negative effects of partner violence on mental health. J Women’s Health Gend Based Med. 2002; 11(5): 465–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kocot T, Goodman L. The roles of coping and social support in battered women’s mental health. Violence Against Women. 2003; 9(3): 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mitchell MD, Hargrove GL, Collins MH, Thompson MP, Reddick TL, Kaslow NJ. Coping variables that mediate the relation between intimate partner violence and mental health outcomes among low-income, African American women. J Clin Psychol. 2006; 62(12): 1505–1520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sorenson SB, Taylor CB. Female aggression towards male intimate partners: an examination of social norms in a community based sample. Psychol Women Q. 2005; 29: 78–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bent-Goodley TB. Perceptions of domestic violence: a dialogue with African American women. Health Soc Work. 2004; 29(4): 307–315.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Koepsell JK, Kernic MA, Holt VL. Factors that influence battered women to leave their abusive relationships. Violence Vict. 2006; 21(2): 131–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cialdini RB, Reno RR, Kallgren CA. A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990; 58: 1015–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cialdini RB. Descriptive social norms as underappreciated sources of social control. Psychometrika. 2007; 72(2): 263–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB. The revised conflict tactics scales (CTS2). J Fam Issues. 1996; 17: 283–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McDonnell KA, Gielen AC, O’Campo PR, Burke JG. Abuse, HIV status and health related quality of life among low income women. Qual Life Res. 2005; 14: 945–957.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jewkes R. Intimate partner violence: causes and prevention. Lancet. 2002; 359(9315): 1423–1429.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Self-Brown S, Rheingold AA, Campbell C, de Arellano MA. A media campaign prevention program for child sexual abuse: community members perspectives. J Interpers Violence. 2008; 23(6): 728–743.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wray RJ, Hornik RM, Gandy OH, Stryker J, Ghez M, Mitchell-Clark K. Preventing domestic violence in the African American community: assessing the impact of dramatic radio serial. J Health Commun. 2004; 9: 31–52.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Burkitt KH, Larkin GL. The transtheoretical model in intimate partner violence victimization: stages of change over time. Violence Vict. 2008; 23(4): 411–431.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gladwell M. The Tipping Point. NY: Little, Brown and Company; 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Academy of Medicine 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen Ann McDonnell
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jessica G. Burke
    • 2
  • Andrea C. Gielen
    • 3
  • Patricia O’Campo
    • 4
  • Meghan Weidl
    • 1
  1. 1.George Washington University SPHHSWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.University of Pittsburgh School of Public HealthPittsburghUSA
  3. 3.Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.University of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations