Understanding intimate partner violence in context: social and community correlates of special and general victimization

Figures & data

Table 1. The prevalence of IPV and other violent victimization by gender, and the overlap of IPV and other violent victimization (=poly-victimization) in the full data and by gender (percentages are weighted)

	Males		Females		Pearson’s χ2
IPV victimization, %	2.7%		5.2%		102.23***
Other violent victimization, %	10.8%		12.4%		17.47***
N	11,664		14,263
IPV victimization
	No		Yes		Pearson’s χ2
Full data
Other violent victimization, %	11.3%		19.8%		69.89***
N	25,006		921
Females
Other violent victimization, %	11.9%		21.6%		54.40***
N	13,620		643
Males
Other violent victimization, %	10.6%		16.4%		11.41***
N	11,386		278

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01. *p < 0.05.

Table 2. Multilevel logistic regression analyses of the risk of violent victimization for three non-overlapping victimization outcomes

			Single-type non-IPV violent victimization		Single-type IPV victimization		Difference from single-type non-IPV violent victimization	Poly-victimization		Difference from single-type non-IPV violent victimization
			B	SE	B	SE	Sig. (P-value)	B	SE	Sig. (P-value)
Fixed effects
		Intercept	−4.29***	0.26	−5.59***	0.42	*	−10.10***	1.00	***
Individual level
	Gender	Female (vs. male)	0.19***	0.04	0.58***	0.08	***	1.04***	0.17	***
	Age		−0.04***	<0.01	−0.03***	<0.01	**	−0.05***	<0.01
	Immigrant background	Yes (vs. no)	−0.10	0.08	−0.23	0.15		0.03	0.27
	Education level	Secondary education (vs. primary education or less)	0.33***	0.07	0.06	0.12	**	−0.10	0.22
		Tertiary education (vs. primary education or less)	0.24**	0.08	0.18	0.13		−0.43	0.25	*
	Marital status	Unmarried (vs. married)	0.39***	0.06	−0.42***	0.11	***	0.33	0.21
		Co-habiting (vs. married)	0.11	0.06	0.37***	0.10	**	0.27	0.24
		Divorced or separated (vs. married)	0.48***	0.09	0.71***	0.12		0.74*	0.30
		Widowed (vs. married)	−0.13	0.23	−0.67	0.40		0.41	0.64
	Financial difficulties		0.22***	0.02	0.27***	0.03		0.53***	0.06	***
	Property crime victimization	Yes (vs. no)	0.98***	0.06	0.50***	0.11	***	1.73***	0.17	***
Postal-code-area level
	Neighbourhood disorder		0.30*	0.15	0.48*	0.24		0.48	0.56
	Proportion of rental accommodation		0.52*	0.23	0.35	0.37		−0.11	0.83
	Proportion of low-income residents		−1.36*	0.62	−1.86	1.03		3.14	2.05	*
Random effects			Variance	SD	Variance	SD		Variance	SD
Postal-code-area level
	Intercept		0.13	0.35	0.21	0.46		1.46	1.21

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01. *p < 0.05.

Table

		%	N
IPV victimization	No	96.1	25,006	Age	Mean	44.36
	Yes	3.9	921		Min	15
					Max	75
Non-IPV violent victimization	No	88.4	23,407
	Yes	11.6	2520	Financial difficulties	Mean	3.17
					Min	1
Gender	Male	49.7	11,664		Max	6
	Female	50.3	14,263
				Neighbourhood disorder	Mean	1.67
Immigrant background	No	94.0	24,38		Min	1.05
	Yes	6.0	1547		Max	2.38
Education level	Primary education or less	14.9	4514	Proportion of rental accommodation	Mean	0.35
	Secondary education	49.6	1301		Min	0.01
	Tertiary education	35.5	8403		Max	0.92
Marital status	Married	45.1	12,954	Proportion of low-income residents	Mean	0.19
	Unmarried	25.8	5235		Min	0.09
	Co-habiting	19.0	4434		Max	0.61
	Divorced or separated	7.8	2428
	Widowed	2.3	876
Property-crime victimization	No	90.4	23,625
	Yes	9.6	2302