The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2021
DOI: 10.1007/s10508-021-01958-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intersectional Minority Stress and Intimate Partner Violence: The Effects of Enacted Stigma on Racial Minority Youth Assigned Female at Birth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Cohabitation was associated with increased risk of IPV perpetration. Participants’ Internalized homonegativity was positively associated with IPV perpetration, while partner’s internalized homonegativity was not Swann et al ( 2021 ) Intersectional minority stress and intimate partner violence: the effects of enacted stigma on racial minority youth assigned female at birth USA N = 249 (FAB) Severe psychological violence, severe physical violence, and sexual IPV; SGM-Specific IPV tactics SGM-CTS2; SGM-Specific IPV Tactics Scale Heterosexist enacted stigma was positively related to psychological and sexual IPV perpetration, but not to physical or sexual and gender minority-specific IPV. Racist enacted stigma was positively related to physical and sexual IPV perpetration.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Cohabitation was associated with increased risk of IPV perpetration. Participants’ Internalized homonegativity was positively associated with IPV perpetration, while partner’s internalized homonegativity was not Swann et al ( 2021 ) Intersectional minority stress and intimate partner violence: the effects of enacted stigma on racial minority youth assigned female at birth USA N = 249 (FAB) Severe psychological violence, severe physical violence, and sexual IPV; SGM-Specific IPV tactics SGM-CTS2; SGM-Specific IPV Tactics Scale Heterosexist enacted stigma was positively related to psychological and sexual IPV perpetration, but not to physical or sexual and gender minority-specific IPV. Racist enacted stigma was positively related to physical and sexual IPV perpetration.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Thirty-nine studies assessed IPV perpetration with some version of the conflict tactics scale (CTS; Ayhan Balik & Bilgin, 2021 ; Bartholomew et al, 2008a , b ; Causby et al, 1995 ; Balsam & Szymanski, 2005 ; Chong et al, 2013 ; Craft & Serovich, 2005 ; Craft et al, 2008 ; Edwards & Sylaska, 2013 ; Edwards et al, 2021 ; Leone et al, 2022 ; Lewis et al, 2017 ; Li et al, 2019 , 2022 ; Li & Zheng, 2021 ; Gabbay & Lafontaine, 2017a ; Gabbay & Lafontaine, 2017b ; Jones & Raghavan, 2012 ; Kelley et al, 2014 ; Landolt & Dutton, 1997 ; Lewis et al, 2018 ; Mason et al, 2016 ; McKenry et al, 2006 ; Milletich et al, 2014 ; Oringher & Samuelson, 2011 ; Pepper & Sand, 2015 ; Pistella et al, 2022 ; Stephenson et al, 2011b ; Stults et al, 2021b ; Swan et al, 2021 ; Swann et al, 2021 ; Taylor & Neppl, 2020 ; Tognasso et al, 2022 ; Whitton et al, 2021 ; Wu et al, 2015 ; Stults et al, 2015b ; Stults et al, 2016 ; Waterman et al, 1989 ; Whitton et al, 2019 ; Zavala, 2017 ). Other used assessment tools were the Intimate Partner Violence Among Gay and Bisexual Men (IPV-GBM) Scale (10 studies; Davis et al, 2016 ; Jones & Raghavan, 2012 ; Sharma et al, 2021 ; Stephenson & Finneran, 2016 ; Stephenson & Finneran, 2017 ; Suarez et al, 2018 ; Wei et al, 2020a , b , 2021 ; Zhu et al, 2021 ); the Psychological Maltreatment of Women Inventory (three studies; Bartholomew et al, 2008a ...…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, the work that has been done indicates that SGM are at greater risk of experiencing psychological, sexual, and physical IPV in comparison to their cisgender heterosexual counterparts during both adolescence (Dank et al, 2014; Luo et al, 2014; Olsen et al, 2017) and young adulthood (Blosnich & Bossarte, 2012; Porter & Williams, 2011). In contrast to cisgender heterosexual youth, SGM face unique risk factors, such as exposure to anti-SGM stigma (Carvalho et al, 2011; Swann et al, 2019) and less access to resources (Ford et al, 2013), which likely contribute to their differing experiences of IPV. Among SGM, those who are female-assigned at birth (FAB) have reported significantly higher rates of IPV compared to those who are male-assigned at birth (MAB) (Martin-Storey, 2015; Whitton et al, 2019b).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%