Intimate Partner Violence and COVID-19
Location
Culp Ballroom
Start Date
4-7-2022 9:00 AM
End Date
4-7-2022 12:00 PM
Poster Number
127
Faculty Sponsor’s Department
Psychology
Name of Project's Faculty Sponsor
Jill Stinson
Competition Type
Competitive
Type
Poster Presentation
Project's Category
Psychology
Abstract or Artist's Statement
Intimate Partner Violence and COVID-19
Erin G. Siegel, BA, Rachel K. Carpenter, MS, & Jill D. Stinson, PhD
Department of Psychology, College of Arts & Sciences, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
Intimate partner violence includes physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse. In the US, a decline in reported rates over the past two decades may have been reversed by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly during the initial lockdown in March 2020. A majority of Americans were isolated at home, potentially increasing the occurrence of IPV assaults. Few studies have evaluated changes in IPV rates throughout the pandemic. This study aims to estimate and compare the rates of intimate partner assaults during the COVID-19 pandemic to previous years, while also examining the influence of geographic location (e.g., rurality versus urban areas), age of the victim, and nature of the assault type. The hypotheses are as follows: 1) an increase in cases of IPV during the first quartile of the pandemic, followed by a decline in the later recent quartiles (i.e., end of 2020); 2) an increase in IPV during the COVID-19 pandemic being more pronounced in counties with greater rurality; 3) an increase in IPV in persons over 18 during the first quartile of the pandemic compared to those under 18 age (who are less likely to live with a partner); and 4) predominant assault type rates (e.g., forcible rape versus murder) may have changed during the pandemic. Data for this project were obtained from the Tennessee Incident-Based Reporting System (TIBRS) for secondary data analysis. From 2016 to 2020 there were 371,196 reported IPV assaults. Variables of interest include all 95 Tennessee counties, age of victim (e.g., over or under 18), and the type of assault (forcible rape, forcible fondling, forcible sodomy, sexual assault with an object, simple assault, aggravated assault, homicide, intimidation, and stalking). Data describing county rurality were obtained from the online County Health Rankings and Roadmaps. County-level rates of IPV are separated by quartile during the pandemic months (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4). Descriptive analyses will determine the yearly rates of IPV assaults from 2016-2020, with a specific examination of rates during the pandemic quartiles, age distribution, variability among types of assaults, and which counties demonstrate the highest reports. Percent change analyses will evaluate the previous years and determine if there was a significant change in IPV rates throughout the pandemic. Subsequent analyses will compare rates of IPV in rural and urban counties. This project aims to examine how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected rates of IPV, which may inform current prevention and intervention efforts. Additionally, data from urban and rural communities will potentially highlight treatment disparities, providing valuable information pertaining to resource allocation.
Intimate Partner Violence and COVID-19
Culp Ballroom
Intimate Partner Violence and COVID-19
Erin G. Siegel, BA, Rachel K. Carpenter, MS, & Jill D. Stinson, PhD
Department of Psychology, College of Arts & Sciences, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
Intimate partner violence includes physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse. In the US, a decline in reported rates over the past two decades may have been reversed by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly during the initial lockdown in March 2020. A majority of Americans were isolated at home, potentially increasing the occurrence of IPV assaults. Few studies have evaluated changes in IPV rates throughout the pandemic. This study aims to estimate and compare the rates of intimate partner assaults during the COVID-19 pandemic to previous years, while also examining the influence of geographic location (e.g., rurality versus urban areas), age of the victim, and nature of the assault type. The hypotheses are as follows: 1) an increase in cases of IPV during the first quartile of the pandemic, followed by a decline in the later recent quartiles (i.e., end of 2020); 2) an increase in IPV during the COVID-19 pandemic being more pronounced in counties with greater rurality; 3) an increase in IPV in persons over 18 during the first quartile of the pandemic compared to those under 18 age (who are less likely to live with a partner); and 4) predominant assault type rates (e.g., forcible rape versus murder) may have changed during the pandemic. Data for this project were obtained from the Tennessee Incident-Based Reporting System (TIBRS) for secondary data analysis. From 2016 to 2020 there were 371,196 reported IPV assaults. Variables of interest include all 95 Tennessee counties, age of victim (e.g., over or under 18), and the type of assault (forcible rape, forcible fondling, forcible sodomy, sexual assault with an object, simple assault, aggravated assault, homicide, intimidation, and stalking). Data describing county rurality were obtained from the online County Health Rankings and Roadmaps. County-level rates of IPV are separated by quartile during the pandemic months (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4). Descriptive analyses will determine the yearly rates of IPV assaults from 2016-2020, with a specific examination of rates during the pandemic quartiles, age distribution, variability among types of assaults, and which counties demonstrate the highest reports. Percent change analyses will evaluate the previous years and determine if there was a significant change in IPV rates throughout the pandemic. Subsequent analyses will compare rates of IPV in rural and urban counties. This project aims to examine how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected rates of IPV, which may inform current prevention and intervention efforts. Additionally, data from urban and rural communities will potentially highlight treatment disparities, providing valuable information pertaining to resource allocation.