Mid Sweden University

Objectives

This work explores the association between socio-economic position (SEP) and intimate partner violence (IPV) considering the perspectives of men and women as victims, perpetrators and as both (bidirectional).

Study design

Cross-sectional international multicentre study.

Methods

A sample of 3496 men and women, (aged 18–64 years), randomly selected from the general population of residents from six European cities was assessed: Athens; Budapest; London; Östersund; Porto; and Stuttgart. Their education (primary, secondary and university), occupation (upper white collar, lower white collar and blue collar) and unemployment duration (never, ≤12 months and >12 months) were considered as SEP indicators and physical IPV was measured with the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales.

Results

Past year physical IPV was declared by 17.7% of women (3.5% victims, 4.2% perpetrators and 10.0% bidirectional) and 19.8% of men (4.1% victims, 3.8% perpetrators and 11.9% bidirectional). Low educational level (primary vs university) was associated with female victimisation (adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 3.2; 1.3–8.0) and with female bidirectional IPV (4.1, 2.4–7.1). Blue collar occupation (vs upper white) was associated with female victimisation (2.1, 1.1–4.0), female perpetration (3.0, 1.3–6.8) and female bidirectional IPV (4.0, 2.3–7.0). Unemployment duration was associated with male perpetration (>12 months of unemployment vs never unemployed: 3.8; 1.7–8.7) and with bidirectional IPV in both sex (women: 1.8, 1.2–2.7; men: 1.7, 1.0–2.8).

Conclusions

In these European centres, physical IPV was associated with a disadvantaged SEP. A consistent socio-economic gradient was observed in female bidirectional involvement, but victims or perpetrators-only presented gender specificities according to levels of education, occupation differentiation and unemployment duration potentially useful for designing interventions.