Measuring personal beliefs and perceived norms about intimate partner violence: Population-based survey experiment in rural Uganda.
Outcomes: Gender‑Based Violence
View SourceKey Social Norms Take-aways The findings reveal that social norms around IPV are shaped by whether women are perceived as blameworthy. People are more likely to condone violence if a woman is seen as intentionally violating expectations. The study found that, in the measurement of personal beliefs and perceived norms about the acceptability of intimate partner violence, study participants were sensitive to contextual information about the circumstances surrounding the violence. Moreover, contextual details had larger effects on personal beliefs than on perceived norms. Accurate measurement of norms requires surveys that account for this nuance. These insights are essential for designing programs and policies aimed at transforming harmful gender norms and reducing acceptance of IPV.
Objectives This study investigated how different ways of presenting survey questions—specifically, the intentionality behind a woman’s actions—affect personal beliefs and perceived norms about the acceptability of intimate partner violence (IPV) in rural Uganda. The goal was to assess the accuracy of standard survey methods, like those used in the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), in capturing attitudes toward IPV.
Methods Researchers embedded a randomized survey experiment into a population-based household survey of 1,334 adults living in Nyakabare Parish, a rural community in Uganda. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three versions of survey questions: a DHS-style version with minimal context, a version where the wife was depicted as intentionally violating gender norms, and a version where the violation was unintentional. Each version included five scenarios commonly used in IPV attitude surveys. Participants were asked about both their personal beliefs and their perceptions of community norms regarding the acceptability of IPV. Analyses used partial proportional odds regression models, adjusting for sex and village.
Results Participants who received the DHS-style survey, which lacked contextual detail, endorsed intimate partner violence (IPV) as acceptable in an average of 1.26 out of 5 scenarios. This increased to 2.74 among those shown vignettes where the wife intentionally violated gender norms and dropped to 0.77 among those shown unintentional violations. Compared to the DHS-style group, the intentional variant significantly increased acceptance of IPV (adjusted odds ratios ranged from 3.87 to 5.74), while the unintentional variant reduced endorsement (adjusted odds ratios ranged from 0.29 to 0.70). A similar trend appeared for perceived community norms: the intentional variant increased the perception that IPV was normative (adjusted odds ratios ranged from 2.05 to 3.51), while the unintentional variant lowered this perception (adjusted odds ratios ranged from 0.49 to 0.65).
Conclusions Details about the context and intent behind a woman’s behavior have a major effect on whether respondents justify IPV. Standard survey questions that omit such context—like those used in the DHS—may produce biased or misleading results. This study highlights the need for more accurate, context-sensitive tools to measure beliefs and norms related to IPV.
Disclaimer: These summaries were generated with the assistance of artificial intelligence and are based on the interpretation of source documents. While efforts have been made to ensure accuracy and clarity, there may be errors or omissions. Users are encouraged to consult the original documents for complete and authoritative information.