IPV in the Workplace: Measuring Interference and Restraint Tactics

Background: Research has established that intimate partner violence (IPV) negatively impacts both the productivity and health of IPV victims (CDC, 2003). Abusers have been documented to engage in work restraint and interference (WRI) tactics that undermine IPV victims’ ability to maintain stable employment.  These tactics may range from on-site harassment to preventing victims from going to work by causing visible injuries, failing to provide child care, or even hiding clothing or car keys (Swanberg, Logan, & Macke, 2005).  Although many workplace policies are becoming more supportive, IPV victims are still reluctant to disclose. Improved employer training and tools are needed to ensure recognition and appropriate response to IPV (O’Leary-Kelly, et al, 2008).  Riger and colleagues (2000) developed a 12-item Work restraint/interference scale (WRI) which was validated with IPV shelter residents. To date this instrument has not been validated with a general population employee sample.   This study had two objectives:  1. validate the WRI with a general population employee sample and 2. evaluate whether WRI can serve as a proxy for employee IPV.

Method: 535 employees within a large corporation completed a web-based survey over a 6 week period.  WRI and Composite Abuse Scale which measured abusive behaviors experienced during the past year were administered.

Analysis: Principal axis factor analysis was conducted in SPSS to identify underlying factor structure. Bivariate correlations were conducted to examine the relationship between WRI and IPV.

Results: Females comprised 57% of the sample with 76% in a cohabiting relationship. The mean participant age was 45.8 years old and 64% had earned a college degree. A single factor solution was supported that explained 45.6% of the variance. The scale’s Cronbach’s alpha was .89.  All items had factor loadings > .50 and < .90.  Pearson’s correlation statistic was between past year WRI and IPV was .77 (<.000 sig.). 

Conclusion:  This study supports the reliability and validity of the WRI in a general employee population. While the original scale included two subscales (interference and restraint), this study found support for a unidimensional construct that includes elements of both interference and restraint. WRI includes aspects of abuse that are often overlooked or minimized because they don’t always include physical violence. The strong relationship between WRI and IPV suggests questions about workplace restraint and interference can be used sensitively by employee assistance workers to identify and help employees who are experiencing IPV. Further this study provides greater evidence that the WRI can be used to examine this important dimension of abuse experiences across a range of populations.