Development and validation of the scale of psychological abuse in intimate partner violence (EAPA-P)
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: In the context of intimate partner violence, psychological abuse (PA) has progressively gained scientific relevance. Even so, a greater effort is needed to define and evaluate psychological intimate partner abuse. A new exhaustive and operative taxonomy of PA strategies leads to the contribution of a new evaluation instrument. METHOD: Participants were 101 women between 24 and 82 years old, who were abused by their partners and attended to in different municipal Catalan services, specialized in the topic. RESULTS: The analyses have shown the suitability of a 19-item instrument divided into two factors: (1) direct PA strategies and (2) indirect PA strategies. The former includes strategies that affect the emotional, cognitive and behavioral dimension of the victim. The latter includes items that measure the amount of control and domination over the victim’s context. This scale has adequate psychometric properties in terms of score reliability and the validity of the relationship with other women’s health variables. CONCLUSIONS: The EAPA-P, created based on a new definition and taxonomy of the forms of PA, is presented as a valid instrument to detect and measure intimate partner PA.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Empirical validation of existing measures has validated separate constructs including direct and indirect forms of psychological abuse.
“Empirical validation of existing measures has validated separate constructs including direct and indirect forms of psychological abuse (Marshall, 1999;Porrúa García et al., 2016).”
From The relationship between emotional intimate partner violence and other forms of violence: A metaanalytic review. (2024) · cites this paper as Porrúa García et al., 2016
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 38 · Cited by 44
- Authors
- Porrúa-García, C., Rodríguez-Carballeira, Á., Escartín, J., Gómez-Benito, J., Almendros, C., & Martín-Peña, J.
- Affiliations
- Universidad de Barcelona
- Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
- Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (ES)
- Universidad de Zaragoza (ES)
- Venue
- Psicothema
- Publisher
- Grupo Editorial Psicofundación
- Published
- 2016-05-01
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 28
- Pages
- 214-221
- ISSN
- 0214-9915 (ISSN-L)
- 1886-144X
- OpenAlex
- W2418667370
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 5.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Psicothema (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (publishedVersion)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (submittedVersion)
- Zaguan (University of Zaragoza Repository) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Hispana (submittedVersion)
- Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
- Biblos-e Archivo (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Funders
- Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
- Social Sciences › Demography › Elder Abuse and Neglect
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
- Keywords
- psychological violence, intimate partner violence, scale development, psychometric validation, control and domination, women's health, domestic violence
- MeSH terms
- Intimate Partner Violence, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Self Report
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