![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) encounter unique challenges due to cultural differences, language barriers, and distinct socio-economic dynamics. Yet, their experiences are understudied. This study examines the characteristics of IPV and the help-seeking behaviors among AAPI women survivors by triangulating quantitative findings from a national survey of crime victims and qualitative findings collected from service providers working with AAPI survivors.
Methods
Using a mixed-methods design (QUANT → qual), we contrast the quantitative findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) with qualitative findings on service providers’ experiences and perceptions (Holliday et al., 2020). Quantitative findings were obtained through analyzing NCVS data from 2008 to 2022. We examined demographics, IPV victimization, and help-seeking behaviors among AAPI women aged 18-70, compared with their White, Black, and Latina counterparts (total n=2,447; AAPI n=53). Conditional probabilities, adjusted residuals, and logistic regression analyses were performed to examine differences among racial and ethnic groups. Qualitative findings were obtained through interviews with service providers recruited from an Asian-serving organization addressing gender-based violence (N=20). Thematic analyses were used to examine the data.
Results
The analysis of NCVS showed that AAPI women survivors were more likely to have a college degree (45%), live in a household with a yearly income of $50,000 and above (43%), and experience repeat victimization (85%). Significantly higher proportions of AAPI women reported physical problems due to IPV (95%) and sought professional help for the emotional toll (54%)—with medication being the primary source of aid. Relatively high proportions of AAPI women endorsed the statements “the crime was too trivial” (40%) and “police won’t help” (25%) as reasons for not reporting IPV to law enforcement. Moreover, repeat victimization was associated with more emotional problems (OR=2.79, p=.002), physical problems (OR=2.03, p<.001), professional help-seeking (OR=1.38, p=.004), yet it was associated with less police reporting (OR=0.67, p<.001). Results of the interviews were partially consistent with the NCVS findings. Service providers noted that repeat victimization, negative consequences of repeat victimization, and hesitancy among AAPI women in reporting IPV to the police were common. However, providers observed a markedly different socio-demographic profile of AAPI survivors, with most clients being economically vulnerable (low-income and/or having limited insurance coverage). Providers offered insights on possible explanations for these discrepancies, including limitations related to the sampling designs and language options of the NCVS data.
Conclusions
In light of the small sample size of AAPI survivors in NCVS, the study underscores the need for culturally responsive research tailored for AAPI survivors of IPV. This includes providing different language options, recruiting AAPI survivors from community agencies, and employing snowball sampling techniques. Research lacking these considerations risks misrepresenting AAPI survivors and perpetuating the model minority myth. The finding that AAPI women are more likely to report repeat victimization suggests the need for accessible secondary prevention strategies targeted at AAPI communities. The reliance on medication to manage the emotional toll due to IPV suggests a tendency to address such issues on their own, which could have adverse effects.