2015 Association for Women in Psychology Conference

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health concern that affects the medical and psychological health of approximately 32 million people within the U.S. (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). The National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS) estimated that women aged 18 and older experienced approximately 5.3 million IPV incidents annually (National Center for Injury Prevention and Control [NCIPC], 2003). It thus seems imperative that routine screening be utilized within general healthcare settings in order to meet the needs of clientele. Routine IPV screenings can increase rates of disclosure and subsequent ability to provide support, education, and resources to victims (Punukollu, 2003). This presentation will provide a short review of the problem, including public health population surveillance results that provide IPV rates within the U.S., with special note of high- risk populations. Further, the multiple negative physical and mental health outcomes as a result of IPV victimization will be reviewed, and make the case for the importance of routine screening within all healthcare venues. A targeted literature review exploring IPV screening tools that are currently utilized in healthcare settings will be provided. Each screening tool will be assessed for its ability to detect IPV. A variety of screening tools will be examined ranging from self- report to structured interviews, and each tool will be assessed on four domains: the extent and type of training each provider needs to become proficient with the tool, the availability of referral information in the community, the ease of use for providers, and the time it takes to complete with each client. A “best practices” universal tool for healthcare providers that is based on the screening tools examined will be recommended. Additionally relevant research on clinical, educational, or training components that should be included pre/during/post IPV screening will be reviewed.

Do College Students Feel Unsafe on Campus or at Home? And If So, Which Ones? Many college campuses recently have become concerned about the issue of students’ safety on campus. The current study examines college students’ feeling of being unsafe both on campus and at home. In addition, the students who report feeling unsafe in each context were examined along demographic lines to determine which students feel unsafe on campus, which feel unsafe at home, and whether there is any overlap between the two groups. Participants were 439 college students at a Midwestern university. The sample was 71.9% female and 81.7% were White US citizens. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire including how often they had experienced each of a number of behaviors since they had been in college, as well as demographic questions. A chi-square analysis was conducted on the variables of whether a student had experienced feeling unsafe on campus and experienced feeling unsafe at home, to examine the degree of overlap. The variables were significantly related, Χ2 (1, N = 433) = 37.21, p

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is a major public health problem and global human rights violation (Djamba & Kimuna, 2008; Goo & Harlow, 2012; Laisser, Nyström, Lugina & Emmelin, 2011; Simister, 2010; World Health Organization [WHO], 2013). Hence, IPV in the developing world has increasingly become a topic of public health discourse (Swart, 2013). The devastating effects of IPV on individuals, families and communities are well documented. It is a complex social issue deeply rooted in the interaction of social, cultural, political, economic and biological factors (Dahlberg, & Butchart, 2005). As such, perceptions, prevalence and manifestations of IPV differ from one society to another as they are influenced differently by cultural beliefs and traditions (Akinsulure-Smith, Chu, Keatley, & Rasmussen, 2013; Dada Ojo, 2013). Effective interventions can only be formulated upon conducting qualitative studies that explore the cultural context of an affected population and how they interpret their experiences (Jewkes, 2002). To date, limited research and literature has focused on IPV in Kenya. This qualitative study explored the experiences of Kenyan survivors and IPV perceptions of female community members. Data analysis was conducted using a conventional content analysis approach (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). Seven primary themes emerged from survivor focus group data: cultural context of violence; risk factors for violence; types of violence; consequences of violence; response to violence; perseverance; and, helpseeking. Seven primary themes also emerged from the female community members’ focus group data: snapshot of violence; poverty; cultural context; masculinity; women taking action; resources; and, prevention strategies. Sentiments expressed by these survivors and community members provide powerful insight into experiences of violence including the risk factors, consequences, how the community responds and how survivors cope with the violence they experience. Emergent themes inform us as we think about IPV prevention efforts and restorative justice within this cultural context.

Intimate partner homicide (IPH) is the most severe form of intimate partner violence. According to the Violence Policy Center (2014) four to five women are murdered daily by an intimate partner. This statistic comes from reports submitted voluntarily by police departments; however, reporting methods may contribute to this problem being under-reported Most researchers have failed to address the risk factors which characterize an increasingly lethal relationship. However, a small subset of researchers have combed through archival reports and interviewed survivors (e.g., Campbell, 2009) to identify risk factors which predict the likelihood of IPH. While notable, IPH researchers have predominantly focused on heterosexual relationships in White and Black communities. Thus there are significant gaps in our knowledge of IPH for different minority communities. There are currently several risk assessment measures utilized to recognize women at risk of victimization as well as identify potential perpetrators. The majority of these instruments are used in the criminal justice system to make decisions regarding a perpetrator’s likelihood recidivism and probation rulings. Additionally, an increasing number of health clinics and hospitals are using risk assessments to identify potential victims in general practice and obstetrics. Could psychology benefit from adopting this practice? This presentation provides brief overview of the IPH literature and addresses gaps in the research. The presenter will identify risk factors in heterosexual, predominantly white relationships with a male perpetrator. Although women as the homicide victims are provided with more attention than their perpetrator counterparts, risk factors related to female perpetrators will also be highlighted. The presentation will also increase participants’ awareness and ability to assess risk factors for IPH in their clients. Lastly, the utility of risk assessments in clinical practice will be discussed.