IPV Victimization and Perpetuation Among Black College Students

Background:Two to five in every ten undergraduate college students in North America experience intimate partner violence (IPV). Women of color experience IPV about two times more than White women, and Black women experience IPV more than any other group of women. Yet, existing evidence have gaps in understanding of 1) IPV experience among Black college students attending predominantly white institutions (PWIs), 2) their help-seeking behaviors, and 3) bidirectional IPV. Holistic exploration of help-seeking behaviors and factors predicting IPV victimization and perpetration among Black undergraduate college students attending PWIs needs to be under consideration.

Methods: College students (N=4843) that attend in 4 PWIs in the United States and Canada between March 2016 and December 2016 completed an online survey. This study only used data of Black college students (N=155) who have had any intimate partner relationship in their lifetime longer than a month. An average age of the participants was 20.4 and 78.1% of the students were female. The study employed descriptive statistics to understand prevalence of IPV victimization and perpetration and help-seeking and bivariate statistics to understand gender differences in IPV victimization and perpetration. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine risk factors (neighborhood environment, cumulative exposure to violence, and IPV victimization/perpetration) of IPV victimization and perpetration.

Results: 49% of the participants experienced psychological violence, followed by physical violence (25.2%), technological violence (19.7%), sexual violence (19.4%), and threats (14.8%). 32.7% of the participants committed psychological violence, followed by physical violence (22.7%), technological violence (10.7%), threats (12.1%), and sexual violence (2%). There was no gender difference in both victimization and perpetration at p=0.05. However, sexual violence victimization (M=3.32, SD= .69 for female and M=.12, SD=.33 for male) was statistically different by gender; t(152)=2.37, p=.02 while sexual violence perpetration was not statistically different. Findings from multiple regression model for victimization and perpetration as a dependent variable, respectively, showed that victimization predicted perpetration, b = .82, t(143) = 6.61, p < .001 and vice versa b = .29, t(143) = 6.61, p< .001 while current neighborhood environment and cumulative exposure to violence did not have statistically significant impact on either variable. Less than a quarter of the respondents had ever told someone of their IPV experience. Only 6.2% of the respondents used counseling service due to IPV. 50 participants did not seek help because IPV is a private or personal matter or they can take care of by themselves.  

Implications: The findings show that IPV among Black college students could be bidirectional between partners, and female students are more likely to be a victim of sexual violence compared to male students. The finding of IPV victimization predicting IPV perpetration may mean that IPV victims may have used violence to fight back against the perpetrator. More research exploring the nature of this relationship is needed. IPV prevention programs targeting Black college students attending PWIs should aim to raise awareness of IPV and change their attitudes towards help-seeking for IPV.