Does Perceived Injury Explain the Effects of Gender on Attributions of Blame for Intimate Partner Violence? A Factorial Vignette Analysis

Perpetrator and victim gender influence how blame is assigned in intimate partner violence (IPV) scenarios. Although men’s differential capacity to inflict and sustain harm is posited as the reason male perpetrators and victims receive more blame for IPV, it is possible that other aspects of the construct of gender, such as gender role beliefs, underscore these effects. Using a sample of 323 college students and a factorial vignette design that varied body sizes and genders of victims and perpetrators, we examined the extent to which perceptions of physical injury accounted for the effects of perpetrator and victim gender on blame attributions, and whether adherence to traditional gender roles moderated any influences of gender unassociated with perceived injury. For female perpetrators, participants estimated lower levels of perceived injury and greater victim blame, with the former effect predominantly accounting for the latter. Male victims were viewed as less injured and more blameworthy, but the latter finding was not predominantly driven by injury perceptions. Perceived physical injury also did not account for why females perpetrating against males were blamed least. Controlling for differences in perceived injury, those holding more traditional gender views blamed victims of female violence more than victims of male-perpetrated violence. Notably, variations in body physical size were not associated with injury perceptions or blame attributions. These findings overall suggest that gender does influence blame attributions by way of perceived physical injury, but other aspects of the construct of gender are also relevant to these evaluations.

     

Appetitive aggression in former combatants--derived from the ongoing conflict in DR Congo

Soldiers and combatants often report that committing violence can be appealing, fascinating and exciting (Elbert, Weierstall, & Schauer, 2010). This appetite for aggression was investigated in a sample of 224 former combatants from different armed groups and forces in eastern DRC. In a semistructured interview they were questioned about their military history, exposure to violence and perpetrated violence. Appetitive aggression was assessed with a 15-item-scale (Weierstall & Elbert, 2011), which was successfully implemented in comparable samples (Weierstall, Schalinski, Crombach, Hecker, & Elbert, submitted for publication). A sequential multiple regression was conducted to determine possible predictors of appetitive aggression. Perpetrated violence types, recruitment type, and joining as a child were significant predictors and explained 26% of the variability in appetitive aggression. Duration or military rank within the armed group and exposure to violence did not play a significant role. Thus, combatants reporting high levels of appetitive aggression are characterized by perpetrating a high number of violent acts, joining armed groups on their own accord and as children. Joining an armed group on one's own accord indicates pre-existing appetitive aggression. However, joining young and perpetrating violence on a regular basis seem to intensify the appetite for aggression.     

Manipulation and Single‐Peakedness: A General Result

This article considers environments in which individual preferences are single‐peaked with respect to an unspecified, but unidimensional, ordering of the alternative space. We show that in these environments, any institution that is coalitionally strategy‐proof must be dictatorial. Thus, any nondictatorial institutional environment that does not explicitly utilize an a priori ordering over alternatives in order to render a collective decision is necessarily prone to the strategic misrepresentation of preferences by an individual or a group. Moreover, we prove in this environment that for any nondictatorial institution, the truthful revelation of preferences can never be a dominant strategy equilibrium. Accordingly, an incentive to behave insincerely is inherent to the vast majority of real‐world lawmaking systems, even when the policy space is unidimensional and the core is nonempty.     

‘Nationalising Hundreds and Thousands of Women’: a domestic response to a national problem

The wartime evacuee has become a symbol of the home front in World War Two. However, behind the iconic image lie more complex histories. The government evacuation scheme both encouraged and enforced many homeowners to share their private domestic space with strangers. The preparation, organisation and monitoring of this scheme led to unparalleled public interference into the private space of the home. The enforced domestic intimacy this led to resulted in the voluntary and governmental agencies becoming increasingly entangled in a complex, shifting understanding of ideas of the family, domestic labour, motherhood and the home during wartime.