Cited by 25Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceElder Abuse and NeglectSexual Assault and Victimization Studies

Prevalence and impact of intimate partner violence (IPV) among an ethnic minority population

Open access
Hellemans, Sabine, Loeys, Tom, Buysse, Ann, De Smet, Olivia·2015·Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Abstract

The present study examined the prevalence of lifetime experiences of physical and psychological intimate partner violence (IPV) among members of the Turkish ethnic minority population in Flanders. In addition, this study explored how lifetime IPV victimization affects ethnic minority victims' current mental, relational, and sexual well-being. Using a population-based representative sample, data from 392 adult Turkish women and men were investigated. Lifetime experiences of physical violence were reported by 14.3% of the Turkish respondents, while 66.0% reported at least one incidence of psychological abuse. Women were much more likely than men to report physical IPV victimization, but no gender differences were found for psychological IPV. With regard to the impact of IPV, it was found that lifetime IPV experiences do not appear to affect victims' current mental health. However, higher levels of physical and/or psychological IPV victimization were related to increased levels of relationship dissatisfaction, anxious and avoidant attachment orientations, sexual dissatisfaction, sexual dysfunction (with distress), and to decreased levels of sexual communication. These adverse relational and sexual outcomes of IPV victimization were mainly present among women but were also, to a lesser degree, relevant for men.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0886260514563830

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some authors found an inverse pattern of results with associations between insecure attachment and IPV victimization being significant only among women.

    “some authors found an inverse pattern of results with associations between insecure attachment and IPV victimization being significant only among women (Péloquin et al., 2011; Hellemans et al., 2015).”

    From Exploring Relationships: A Systematic Review on Intimate Partner Violence and Attachment (2018) · cites this paper as Hellemans et al., 2015

    The results section (page unavailable) reports an association between psychological IPV and attachment avoidance only among women. But it also reports elevated attachment anxiety among men who experienced physical IPV, so the broader claim that associations with insecure attachment were significant only among women is not supported. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Three studies in the category pointing out a significant relationship between avoidant attachment and physical IPV victimization suffer from methodological concerns related to the lack of a validated measure of IPV.

    “However, it has to be noted that from the last category, three studies suffer from methodological concerns related to the lack of a validated measure of IPV (Craparo et al., 2014; Hellemans et al., 2015; Karakoç et al., 2015).”
  • Physical IPV victimization was related with attachment avoidance among women and with attachment anxiety among men.

    “Finally, gender differences emerged in the study of Hellemans et al. (2015) suggested that physical IPV victimization was related with attachment avoidance among women and with attachment anxiety among men.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Karazsia, B. T., & van Dulmen, M. H. M. (2010). Modeling infrequent outcomes: Illustrations using prospective predictors of pediatric injuries. In H. Schuster & W. Metzger (Eds.), Biometrics: Methods, applications and analyses (pp. 1-27). New York, NY: Nova Science.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hellemans, S., Loeys, T., Buysse, A., & De Smet, O.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • Ghent University, Belgium
Corresponding author
Hellemans, Sabine
Venue
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Published
2014-12-16
Volume
30
Issue
19
Pages
3389-3418
ISSN
  • 0886-2605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6518
OpenAlex
W2038472807
Cited by
25
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
FWCI
0.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Interpersonal Violence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Vlaamse regering
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Elder Abuse and Neglect
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Keywords
intimate partner violence, physical violence, psychological violence, Flanders, prevalence, mental health, relationship dissatisfaction, attachment styles, sexual dissatisfaction, sexual dysfunction, sexual communication, gender differences
MeSH terms
Intimate Partner Violence, Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Status Schedule, Middle Aged, Minority Groups, Object Attachment, Personal Satisfaction, Sexual Behavior, Turkey, Prevalence, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review