Cited by 44Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceElder Abuse and NeglectChild Abuse and Trauma

Development and validation of the scale of psychological abuse in intimate partner violence (EAPA-P)

Open access
Porrúa-García, Clara, Rodríguez-Carballeira, Álvaro, Escartín, Jordi, Gómez-Benito, Juana, Almendros, Carmen, Martín-Peña, Javier·2016·Psicothema

Abstract

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

Crossref · 10.7334/psicothema2015.197

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

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
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
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