Definitions of Dating Violence among African American College Students:
|
|
Males (n=62) |
Females (n=54) |
T |
p-value |
|
Mean (sd) |
Mean (sd) |
|
|
Defining Dating Violence |
4.11 (.30) |
4.29 (.70) |
-3.12 |
.01 |
Physical Violence Punching face real hard |
5.21 (.20) 1.5 (.7) |
5.52 (.49) 1.3 (.9) |
-2.2 -1.29 |
.005 .04 |
Threaten to use a knife |
1.7 (1.0) |
1.5 (1.3) |
-2.34 |
.87 |
Pushing partner Throwing objects at partner |
2.3 (1.5) 5.31 (.82) |
1.6 (1.1) 5.59 (.71) |
-2.35 -1.76 |
.04 .08 |
Sexual Violence Forcing partner to have sex |
5.9 (.33) 5.94 (.32) |
5.8 (.31) 5.80 (.36) |
.24 .24 |
.89 .89 |
Psychological Violence |
3.7 (1.23) |
4.0 (1.35) |
-1.78 |
.26 |
Demand to know where P is all the time |
2.9 (1.45) |
3.3 (1.45) |
-1.45 |
.15 |
Criticize P in front of others |
3.5 (1.8) |
2.9 (1.7) |
-1.89 |
.17 |
Not let P make any decisions |
3.7 (1.9) |
2.9 (1.7) |
-1.61 |
.20 |
Disregard feelings & option |
3.1 (1.5) |
3.1 (1.7) |
-1.56 |
.50 |
Attitudes Toward Women |
3.02 (.33) |
3.26 (.24) |
-3.65 |
.001 |
Cursing by W more repulsive |
2.8(1.2) |
1.8(1.1) |
2.78 |
.001 |
Men should share housework |
2.0(1.0) |
1.2(.5) |
-1.87 |
.01 |
Obey in vows insulting to W |
2.3(1.1) |
2.2(1.2) |
-2.98 |
.12 |
W free to propose marriage |
1.8(.9) |
2.3(1.2) |
-1.45 |
.005 |
W should worry less about right, and more about being good wives/mothers |
2.5(1.3) |
3.8(.6) |
-1.46 |
.25 |
W right to work with men |
2.3(1.0) |
1.4(.8) |
-1.67 |
.45 |
W less freedom of action |
2.7(1.1) |
3.5(.9) |
1.55 |
.12 |
Gender-based work |
2.6(1.3) |
3.1(1.1) |
2.45 |
.12 |
Men intellectual leaders |
2.5(1.0) |
3.7(.6) |
3.55 |
.03 |
Equal opportunity |
2.3(1.0) |
1.2(.6) |
-.99 |
.001 |
Split cost on dates |
2.2(1.1) |
2.9(1.0) |
2.56 |
.89 |
Sons should go to college |
2.9(1.3) |
3.8(.6) |
2.13 |
.001 |
Father authority, child rearing |
2.5(1.2) |
3.4(.9) |
1.76 |
.06 |
Economic and social freedom |
2.3(1.0) |
2.4(.9) |
-1.34 |
.10 |
Male job preference over W |
2.5(1.0) |
1.3(.9) |
3.13 |
.01 |
Based on the findings from the three subscales, physical, psychological, and sexual definitions of dating violence, the statistical analysis suggested that a relationship existed between attitudes toward women and definitions of dating violence among African Americans.
A review of the Pearson Correlation statistical analysis indicated a significant positive correlation between the following relationships: How one defines dating violence and attitudes toward women (p=.03, r=.21); physical violence and attitudes toward women (p=.002, r=.31); psychological violence and physical violence (p=.06, r-.27); sexual violence and definitions of dating violence (p=.004, r=.27)); and sexual violence and physical violence (p=.011, r=.24). In addition, the Pearson's Correlation statistical analysis further indicated a strong positive relationship between physical violence and definitions of dating violence scale (p=0, r=.53) and psychological violence and definitions of dating violence (p=0, r=.95).
Collectively, the African American college population exhibited liberal viewpoints concerning women. However, a significant difference existed in the gender role beliefs between the men and women students. According to this study, African American male college students believed that men should hold positions of power in the work force and women should not succumb to the use of profanity and swearing. Existing literature corroborated this credence that patriarchal and traditional norms continue to influence gender role beliefs (Barrs & Neville, 2008). This study also found no significant difference in how African American male and female students define dating violence. In accordance with this finding, African American college students have been socialized to accept non-gender specific roles to facilitate their economic survival (Barrs & Neville, 2008). African American families have been predisposed to an egalitarian lifestyle to compensate for the limitations placed on them by the larger society. African Americans may dismiss the traditional male and female gender roles held by the dominant society because they reflect a world view perpetuated by white male and female culture.
Interestingly, in interpreting each subscale of the Yick (1997) definition of dating violence scale, data proposed a significant difference in the manner in which males define physical violence as opposed to females. An explanation for this can be that men, regardless of ethnicity, continue to hold patriarchal beliefs and view lesser forms of physical aggression, such as, pushing, slapping, and throwing objects as acceptable behaviors. Some researchers insisted that the stresses, strains, and oppression are factors that may contribute to African American men periodically losing their control (Taft, Bryant-Davis, Woodward, Tillman, & Torres, 2009). This could be a result of internalizing their feelings of inadequacies placed upon them by larger society. Another factor that may possibly explain why males and females differ in their definitions of physical violence is that African American men in general have been predisposed to excel in physical activities at an early age, which society promotes as acceptable behavior.
The psychological violence and sexual violence subscales did not show a significant difference between males and females. However, African American college students tend to perceive dating violence more in physical terms than in psychological terms. This conclusion is also supported by earlier research that indicated that there is a general tendency to classify physical forms of aggression as abuse especially among ethnic minorities (Yick, 1997). As a result of ignoring psychological abuse, verbal or other types of psychological aggressions are not viewed as a problem by African American college students. Consequently, abused African American college students, especially who are victims of psychological aggression do not perceive themselves as victim, which further prevents them from seeking appropriate help. It should be emphasized that seemingly nebulous indistinct psychological aggression can often develop into more distinct and dangerous physical violence.
There were significant relationships between various perceptions of dating violence and the attitudes toward women. In general, African American college students who were aware of the range of behaviors that constitute dating violence tended to be more egalitarian towards women. This finding supported the earlier findings that showed a direct relationship between attitudes toward dating violence and gender role beliefs (Sears, Byers, & Price, 2007).
Although this study has provided an in-depth analysis of how dating violence is defined by African American undergraduate college students, there are several limitations. Because our sample is limited to the African American undergraduate college population at a university in rural South and the sample was a nonprobability sample, this study cannot be generalized to all African American college student populations. The manner in which respondents define dating violence may have been influenced by factors such as the mean age of the students and to limiting the survey to African American college students in liberal arts classes. Due to this study being a cross-sectional design, attitudes may change over time and therefore may require a longitudinal design to measure whether or not attitudes change once they leave the college environment.
Changes in attitudes and perceptions are vital for changing behaviors. The researchers recommend macro-level public awareness campaigns targeting attitudinal changes. In addition to disseminating attitude-altering information, discussion should focus on traditional patriarchal ideologies that lie at the heart of the culture. The researchers recommend collaborative efforts to recruit African American community leaders such as religious leaders and notable professionals to educate regarding the seriousness of dating violence problems on campus. The extent to which African American college students are socialized in patriarchal belief systems will influence future attitudes and behaviors. It is the patriarchal ideologies that legitimize the use of violence in relationships, therefore the alternative egalitarian relationships should be encouraged.
Baker, C., & Stith, S. (2008). Factors Predicting Datng Violence Perpetration among college male and female college students. Journal of Agression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 17(2), 227-244.
Barrs, S. C., & Neville, H. A. (2008). Examination of the link between parental racial socialization messages and racial ideology among Black college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 34(2), 131-155.
Black, M., Basile, K., Breiding, M., Smith, S., Walters, M., Merrick, M., . . . Stevens, M. (2011). The national intimate partner and sexual violence survey: 2010 summary report (NISVS).
Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Bryant, Y. (2008). Relationships between exposure to rap music videos and attitudes toward relationship . Journal of Black Psychology, 34, 356-380.
Chiung-Tao Shen, A., Yu-Lung Chiu, M., & Gao, J. (2012). Predictors of Dating Violence Among Chinese Adolescents: The Role of Gender-Role Beliefs and Justification of Violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(6), 1066-1089.
Henry, R. R., & Zeytinoglu. (2012). African Americans and teen dating violence. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 40, 20-32.
Lewis, S., & Fremouw, W. (2001). Dating violence: A critical review of the literature. Clinical Psychology Review, 21, 105-127.
Murray, C. E., & Kardatzke, K. N. (Spring 2007). Dating Violence Among College Students: Key Issues for College Counselors. Journal of College Counseling, 10, 79 - 89.
Sears, H. A., Byers, E. S., & Price, E. L. (2007). The co-occurrence of adolescent boys' and girls' use of psychologically, physically, and sexually abusive behaviors in their dating relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 487-504.
Spence, J., Helmreich, R. & Strapp, J. (1973). A short version of the Attitudes toward Women Scale (AWS). Bulletin Pschonomic Society, 2 (4), 219-220.
Taft, C., Bryant-Davis, T., Woodward, H., Tillman, S., & Torres, S. (2009). Intimate partner violence against African American women: An examination of the. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 50-58.
The United States Department of Justice. (2012, December). Areas of Focus. Retrieved from The United States Department of Justice: http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/areas-focus.html
Walley-Jean, J. C., & Swan, C. (2009). Motivations and justifications for partner aggression in a sample of african american college women. Jouranl of Aggression, Mltreatment & Trauma, 18, 698-717.
West, C., & Rose, S. (2000). Dating aggression among low income African-American youth. Violence Gainst Women, 6, 470-494
Yick, A. (1997). Perceptions of and attitudes toward domestic violence in a Los Angeles Chinese community. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 383-395.
|