Men's differential identification with female-perpetrated intimate partner victimization

Cydney A. L. M. Cocking,Flora Oswald,Cory L. Pedersen,Cydney A. L. M. CockingFlora OswaldCory L. Pedersena Department of Psychology,Kwantlen Polytechnic University,Surrey,BC,Canadab Department of Psychology,The Pennsylvania State University,State College,PA,USAc Department of Women's,Gender,& Sexuality Studies,The Pennsylvania State University,State College,PA,USA
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2024.2340980
2024-04-11
Psychology and Sexuality
Abstract:Men are often reluctant to self-identify as victims of female-perpetrated intimate partner violence (f-IPV), despite significant harms. This reluctance results in underreporting of experiences and a concomitant lack of support and resources for male victims. We examined predictors of men's differential self-identification as victims of f-IPV; that is, between men who self-identify both as having experienced and as being a victim of f-IPV (abuse and victim identified = AVI), men who self-identify as having experienced f-IPV, but not as being a victim of f-IPV (abuse-only identified = AI), and men who self-identify as neither having experienced nor being a victim of f-IPV, despite behaviourally having experienced it (non-abuse and non-victim identified = N-AVI). We recruited cisgender men ( N = 212) to an online study examining experiences of f-IPV and identification with abuse. About two-thirds of our sample did not self-identify as victims of f-IPV despite reporting victimisation experiences. We found that frequency of f-IPV, psychological vulnerability from f-IPV, precarious manhood beliefs, and ambivalent sexism significantly predicted men's self-identification as victims of f-IPV. We elucidate predictors of men's reluctance to self-identify as victims of f-IPV, allowing for the identification of men who may be less likely to seek and obtain support.
psychology, multidisciplinary
What problem does this paper attempt to address?