Relative Effects of Intimate Partner Violence Subtypes on Opioid Misuse

Moreland, Malia L.; Yalch, Matthew M.

doi:10.1080/10926771.2023.2165997

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants in this study were 966 women across three samples published in previous studies: women enrolled as undergraduate students at a large public university ( n = 654), mothers with children receiving services at Head Start (a program that assists families with services such as school readiness or prenatal care; n = 144), and female workers on MTurk ( n = 168; see Table 1 for sample demographics; Moreland & Yalch, 2022; Yalch et al, 2016; Yalch & Levendosky, 2018). The notable difference in sample sizes between the university and the Head Start and MTurk samples was not intentional, but rather a result of the university study’s access to a large sample.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in intimate partner violence exposure across college, crowdsourced, and at-risk samples.

Moreland¹,

Yalch²,

Black³

et al. 2024

Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a pervasive and common form of violence against women. IPV is multifaceted, with physical, sexual, and/or psychological means of perpetration, and has detrimental effects on women’s mental health. IPV generally affects women; however, how IPV differentially affects different groups of women is less clear. Women who are socioeconomically vulnerable are often considered at risk for IPV, although women in college are also often the topic of IPV research due both to high rates of IPV and to ease of study recruitment. There is increasing research on the effects of IPV in a third group of women, those recruited through online platforms (i.e., crowdsourcing). How IPV differs across these three samples has yet to be examined. Method: In this study, we examined differences in IPV exposure across three samples of women, at risk (n = 144), college (n = 654), and crowdsourced (n = 168), using a Bayesian approach to general linear modeling. Results: Results indicated that the majority of women in each sample experienced some IPV. Results further suggested that women in the crowdsourced sample had the highest exposure to IPV in general and to physical IPV, sexual IPV, and IPV-related injury in particular, whereas women in the at-risk sample had the highest rates of psychological IPV. Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of sampling in studies of IPV and thus have ramifications for future research.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%