Social Connectedness and Intimate Partner Violence Stacey B Social Connectedness and Intimate Partner Violence Stacey B. Plichta, ScD Jacqueline Jackson, MPH Rhonda Myers, MBA Brandi Blessett, MEd Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia Abstract Methods Results Studies show social connectedness has a significant effect on health. Previous research indicates that intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors may become isolated from others and that this may persist even after the abuser is no longer present. Few studies, however examine this in a community sample. This study explores the relationship of lifetime IPV victimization to social connectedness in a representative sample of women in Virginia. Random digit-dial telephone interviews were conducted with 1,105 women in the Hampton Roads region of Virginia. An analysis of this data showed that overall, 19% of women reported lifetime IPV, most of which occurred over one year ago. IPV survivors had significantly weaker social networks. However, they were just as likely as other women to engage in community and civic activities such as volunteerism, social club activities and church attendance. IPV survivors participate in community activities at similar rates to other women, but they may have difficulty in forming close connections to others. This weakened social network may lead to feelings of isolation and put women at risk for re-victimization. Community and civic agencies could help prevent IPV by developing mechanisms to nurture friendships and connections among their members. Random digit-dial telephone interviews were conducted with 1,105 women in the Hampton Roads region of Virginia. The survey included items about demographics, health, IPV, social networks and participation in community/civic activities. Respondents were demographically similar to area women: the average age was 47.9 years; the median income between $40-$60 thousand; 70% were Caucasian, 24% African-American, 6% other; 59% married, 16% divorced, 15% single and 10% are widowed. Chi-Square tests were performed to determine the significance of the effect of social connectedness on IPV victimization. Civic engagement items were the criteria used to characterize the concept of social connectedness. Civic engagement items included: volunteerism, attendance at government and/or social meeting, voting habits, church attendance, correspondence with family/friends, and internet chatting. The civic engagement items were recoded and scores were then tabulated and classified into the following categories: Little or No Isolation (7-13), Moderately Isolated (14-20), and Highly Isolated (21-28). Overall, 19% of women reported lifetime IPV, most of which occurred over one year ago. IPV survivors had significantly weaker social connections than non-IPV victim. 39% of IPV victims reported little to no isolation as compared to 49.3%. 46.5%of IPV victims reported moderate isolation as compared to 41.6% of non-IPV victims. 14.5% of IPV victims reported being highly isolated as compared to 9.1% of non-IPV victims. In all 61% of IPV victims reported moderate to high isolation whereas 50.7% of non-IPV victims reported moderate to high isolation (p=.01). IPV victims were just as likely as other women to engage in community and civic activities such as volunteerism, social club activities and church attendance. Discussion Intimate partner violence research is salient because of the high direct and indirect costs of IPV victimization to employers, the health care system, and families. This research is also important because IPV victimization perpetuates the cycle of violence within families. IPV survivors participate in community activities at similar rates to other women, but they may have difficulty in forming close connections to others. This weakened social network may lead to feelings of isolation and put women at risk for re-victimization. Community and civic agencies can assist in prevention efforts by creating opportunities that nurture friendships and connections among their members. Introduction Isolation Characteristics IPV Non-IPV P value Little to No Isolation 39.0% 49.3% Overall .010 Moderately Isolated 46.5% 41.6% Highly Isolated 14.5% 9.1% Intimate partner violence (IPV) refers to physical assault, sexual assault, psychological abuse and bettering conducted against a woman by a male intimate partner (Plichta, 2004). IPV has been connected to a wide array of physical and mental health conditions. Indirect costs of IPV total over $1.5 billion annually, representing the value of lost productivity from both paid work and household chores for injured victims and the present value of lifetime earnings from victims of fatal IPV (National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2003). Direct cost total on average $5.8 billion (American Institute on Domestic Violence, 2001), of which 89.7% were attributed to physical assaults (National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2003). Studies show social connectedness has a significant effect on health. Previous research indicates that intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors may become isolated from others and that this may persist even after the abuser is no longer present. Few studies, however examine this in a community sample. This study explores the relationship of lifetime IPV victimization to social connectedness in a representative sample of women in Virginia. References American Institute on Domestic Violence: domestic violence in the workplace statistics. (2001). Retrieved on October 4, 2006 from www.aidv-usa.com/statistics.htm Plichta, Stacey B. (2004). Intimate partner violence and physical health consequences: policy and practical implications. Jrnl of Interpersonal Violence, 19(11), p1295-1323. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2003). Costs of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in the United States. Atlanta, GA: Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved on November 13, 2006 from http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pubres/ipv_cost/index.htm