Valdez-Santiago R, Híjar-Medina MC, Salgado SVN, Rivera-Rivera L, Avila-Burgos L, Rojas R

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 221-231
PDF size: 115.57 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective. To construct and validate a scale to assess violence by the male partner against women. An index of severity of the emotional and physical damage was also designed to assess the intensity of the violent actions against women. Material and Methods. The sample consisted of a total of 26 042 women who participated as respondents in the National Survey on Violence against Women (ENVIM per its abbreviation in Spanish) conducted in Mexico during 2003. Respondents were all users of health services provided by the Mexican government. The questionnaire was organized into 17 sections, one of which was a 27-item scale to assess partner violence. The purpose of this scale was to measure the type (physical, emotional, sexual and financial) and degree of violence based on severity. A severity index was constructed based on two procedures: 1) the validity, reliability, and factor analyses of the scale and 2) the assessment of severity by expert judges who assigned a value to each item of the scale. Results. The validity and reliability results indicated this scale has adequate internal validity (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.99). The factor analysis with Varimax rotation yielded a four-factor solution. The factors were: 1) Psychological violence; 2) Physical violence; 3) Severe physical violence; and 4) Sexual violence. The combination of the four factors accounted for 62.2% of the variance in the scale. Using the ratings from the judges a table of values for each of the violent actions described was obtained. The scores assigned by the judges ranged from 0 to 354. Results revealed a prevalence of 21% partner violence in the last twelve months. The prevalence of psychological violence was 18.5%; of physical violence 10.1%; severe physical violence 6.7% and sexual violence 7.0%. Conclusion. The scale of violence described in this article is a very useful and reliable instrument to assess marital violence against women. It is suggested that this instrument be used in other settings to compare results with different samples.

REFERENCES

1. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Violencia contra la mujer: un tema de salud prioritario. Washington, D.C.: OMS/OPS, 1998.

2. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Informe Mundial sobre la Violencia y la Salud. Washington, D. C.: OPS/OMS, 2003.

3. Ramírez-Rodríguez JC. La violencia de varones contra sus parejas heterosexuales: realidades y desafíos. Un recuento de la producción mexicana. Salud Publica Mex 2006;48 supl 2: S315-S327.

4. Straus M. Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. J Marriage Fam 1979; 4(1): 75-88.

5. Hudson W, McIntosh S. The assessment of spouse abuse: Two quantifiable dimensions. J Marriage Fam 1981; 43:873-885.

6. Parker B, McFarlane J. Nursing assessment of the battered pregnant woman. J Maternal Child Nursing 16:161-164.

7. Marshall L. Development of the severity of violence against women scales. J Fam Violence 1992; 7:103-121.

8. Straus MA, Smith C. Violence on Hispanic families in the United States: Incidence rates and structural interpretations. En: Straus MA, Gelles RJ, ed. Physical violence in American families. New Brunswick, N: Transaction Publishers, 1990: 341-367.

9. Steinmetz S. The battered husband syndrome. Victimology 1978; 2:499-509.

10. Dobash RP, Dobash RE, Wilson M, Daly M. The myth of sexual symmetry in marital violence. Social Problems 1992; 39:71-91.

11. Olaiz G, Franco A, Palma O, Echarri C, Valdez R, Herrera C. Diseño metodológico de la Encuesta Nacional sobre Violencia contra las Mujeres en México. Salud Publica Mex 2006;48 supl 2:S328-S335.

12. Weis JG. Family violence research methodology and design. En: Ohlin L, Tony M, eds. Family violence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989:123-127.

13. Hair J, Anderson R, Tatham R, Black W. Análisis multivariante. 5a edición. España: Prentice Hall, 2000.

14. Cervantes RC, Padilla AM, Salgado de Snyder N. The Hispanic stress inventory: A culturally relevant approach toward psychosocial assessment. Psychol Assess 1991; 3 : 001-0010.

15. Valdez-Santiago R, Salgado de Snayder N. ESP, una escala breve para identificar malestar emocional en la práctica médica de primer nivel: características psicométricas. Salud Mental 2004; 27 (4): 55-62.

16. Majdalani MP, Alemán M, Fayanás R, Guedes A, Mejía RM. Validación de un cuestionario breve para detectar situaciones de violencia de género en las consultas clínicas. Pan Am J Public Health 2005;17(2): 79-83.

17. Cervantes Muñoz C, Ramos Lira L, Saltijeral MT. Frecuencia y dimensiones de la violencia emocional contra la mujer por parte del compañero íntimo. En: Torres M. ed. La violencia doméstica en contexto urbano y rural. México, D.F.: El Colegio de México, 2004.

18. Peek-Asa C et al., Severity of intimate partner abuse indicators as perceived by women in Mexico and the United States. Women & Health 2002; 35(2/3): 165-180.

19. Natera Rey G, Juárez García F, Tiburcio Sainz M. Validez factorial de una escala de violencia hacia la pareja en una muestra nacional mexicana. Salud Mental 2002; 27( 2):31-38.

20. Azaola E. El delito de ser mujer. Hombres y mujeres homicidas en la ciudad de México: historias de vida. México: Plaza y Valdés/CIESAS, 1996:185.

21. Campbell J, P. Alford. Nursing assessment for risk of homicide in battered women. American Nursing Society 1986; 8: 36-51.

22. Stark E, Flitcraft A. Killing the beast within: Woman battering and female suicidology. Int J Health Serv 1995; 23(1): 38-64.