Relationship Contexts as Sources of Socialization: An Exploration of Intimate Partner Violence Experiences of Economically Disadvantaged African American Adolescents

Intimate partner violence (IPV) among African Americans is a serious public health concern. Research suggest that African Americans adolescents, particularly those from economically disadvantaged communities, are at heightened risk for experiencing and perpetrating dating violence compared to youth from other racial and ethnic groups. In the present study, we examined different relationship contexts that are sources of IPV socialization. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 economically disadvantaged African American adolescents. Content analysis yielded five relationship contexts through which the participants witnessed, experienced, and perpetrated IPV: (a) adolescents’ own dating relationships (64%), (b) siblings and extended family members (e.g., cousins, aunts, uncles) (59%), (c) parent-partners (27%), (d) friends (23%), and (e) neighbors (18%). Adolescents also frequently described IPV in their own dating relationships and in parent-partner relationships as mutual. Moreover, they appeared to minimize the experience of IPV in their own relationships. Efforts to reduce rates of IPV among economically disadvantaged African American adolescents should consider these relational contexts through which adolescents are socialized with regards to IPV and adolescents’ beliefs about mutual violence in relationships. Results highlight the importance of culturally relevant prevention and intervention programs that consider these relationship contexts

Gender, Emotion Work, and Relationship Quality: A Daily Diary Study

We use the gender relations perspective from feminist theorizing to investigate how gender and daily emotion work predict daily relationship quality in 74 couples (148 individuals in dating, cohabiting, or married relationships) primarily from the southwest U.S. Emotion work is characterized by activities that enhance others’ emotional well-being. We examined emotion work two ways: trait (individuals’ average levels) and state (individuals’ daily fluctuations). We examined actor and partner effects of emotion work and tested for gender differences. As outcome variables, we included six types of daily relationship quality: love, commitment, satisfaction, closeness, ambivalence, and conflict. This approach allowed us to predict three aspects of relationship quality: average levels, daily fluctuations, and volatility (overall daily variability across a week). Three patterns emerged. First, emotion work predicted relationship quality in this diverse set of couples. Second, gender differences were minimal for fixed effects: Trait and state emotion work predicted higher average scores on, and positive daily increases in, individuals’ own positive relationship quality and lower average ambivalence. Third, gender differences were more robust for volatility: For partner effects, having a partner who reported higher average emotion work predicted lower volatility in love, satisfaction, and closeness for women versus greater volatility in love and commitment for men. Neither gender nor emotion work predicted average levels, daily fluctuations, or volatility in conflict. We discuss implications and future directions pertaining to the unique role of gender in understanding the associations between daily emotion work and volatility in daily relationship quality for relational partners