↓ Skip to main content

When Violence Can Appear With Different Male Partners: Identification of Resilient and Non-resilient Women in the European Union

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
When Violence Can Appear With Different Male Partners: Identification of Resilient and Non-resilient Women in the European Union
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00877
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan Herrero, Pep Vivas, Andrea Torres, Francisco J. Rodríguez

Abstract

Introduction: Little scholarly attention has been paid to the analysis of the history of intimate partner violence (IPV) against women with different male partners and how it could be related to levels of IPV with the current male partner. From this point of view, been a victim of IPV could increase the vulnerability of women and, therefore, exert a negative influence on the selection of partners over time, thus increasing the odds of potentially mating with abusive male partners. Alternatively, for some women victims of IPV in previous relationships, there may be additional resources that reduce their vulnerability to victimization by new partners. Methodology: The present study analyzes levels of IPV in different partners of 2376 heterosexual women from the 28 countries of the European Union living together as a couple who had previously lived with a different male partner. Analysis/Discussion: Multilevel regression results indicated that resilient women were younger, more satisfied with household income, and were involved in shorter relationships. As for their previous levels of victimization, they scored lower on child abuse and non-partner adult victimization. Also, their levels of victimization from previous partners were the same as those of the non-resilient women, with the exception of physical IPV victimization where resilient women scored higher than non-resilient women. Resilient women also informed the interviewer to have ended the abusive relationship because of the violence to a greater extent than non-resilient women and seemed to suffer fewer psychological difficulties due to previous violent relationships. Finally, countries scoring higher on human development index (HDI) showed a larger proportion of resilient women. Conclusion: Resilient women are mostly characterized by fewer psychological difficulties and lower frequency of adverse situations (in childhood or in adulthood) when compared to non-resilient women. Although resilient women reported a higher physical IPV, they nevertheless show fewer psychological sequelae and a greater ability to end abusive relationships. In addition, the human development of the countries in which they live also seems to reinforce their resilience, which suggests combining intervention policies at the individual and contextual levels.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 34 49%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 32%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 29 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2018.
All research outputs
#14,986,462
of 23,053,169 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,318
of 30,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,817
of 330,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#458
of 642 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,169 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 642 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.