https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1985-7712
Figures
Abstract
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is most prevalent in young adults, yet scarce evidence is available regarding South Korean young adults’ experience of IPV and culturally tailored IPV prevention programs. To address this gap, this study aimed to holistically assess IPV victimization and perpetration rates and the related risk and protective factors among Korean young adults. Using online survey data from 600 Korean young adults using simple random sampling, this study found that the lifetime prevalence of both IPV victimization and perpetration was about 30%. Both IPV victimization and perpetration had affected over 20% in the past 12 months. Independent variables in multiple logistic regression models explained 18% and 23% of variances in lifetime IPV victimization and perpetration, respectively. Korean young adults who reported more depressive symptoms were more likely to report IPV victimization. Those who reported more alcohol consumption, traditional attitudes about gender roles, being more tolerant of IPV, and poorer physical health status were also more likely to commit IPV. However, those who had experienced family neglect were less likely to report IPV perpetration. The findings of this study highlighted that childhood adverse experiences minimally explained IPV and that alcohol consumption, mental health, and attitudinal variables should be targets of IPV prevention among Korean young adults.
Citation: An S, Youn J, Zhan Q, Byoun S-J (2024) Exploring risk and protective factors of intimate partner violence in Korean young adults. PLoS ONE 19(12): e0314352. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0314352
Editor: José J. López-Goñi, Universidad Pública de Navarra, SPAIN
Received: October 17, 2023; Accepted: November 9, 2024; Published: December 2, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 An et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper. More granular data cannot be shared given the extreme sensitivity of the topic and potential for participant harm if de-identified data were re-identified. Additionally, these data are subject to South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Act. This determination has been made by the Research Data Service and confirmed with other University authorities; inquiries can be directed to researchdata@library.illinois.edu.
Funding: This study was supported by a Marjorie M. Monkman Research Award, University of Urbana-Champaign School of Social Work. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: NO authors have competing interests.
Introduction
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health issue that affects 11.2% to 27% of South Korean adult men and women [1]. According to the 2021 Korean Violence Against Women Study, IPV constituted about 50% of all forms of violence experienced by South Korean women, generating substantial mental and physical health consequences, including depressive symptoms, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, difficulty trusting others, injury, and physical pain [2]. These consequences can last a lifetime [3]. The need to better prevent IPV among South Korean young adult victims of IPV is clearly urgent.
South Koreans in their 20s face the highest risks of IPV of all age groups, and women have the highest rates [3]; a nationally representative study of women found that among those aged 20–29, rates of physical, sexual, emotional, and controlling abuse ranged from 30% to 51% [2]. These findings aligned with those of studies conducted in the United States [4,5]. However, whereas IPV prevention programs targeting young adults (including college students) are common in Western countries [6–8], very limited information is available to inform contextually appropriate IPV prevention programs for those in South Korea.
Greater attention has addressed IPV among groups that are predominantly older. The 2018 Framework Act on Prevention of Violence Against Women [9] mandated a national survey on IPV. Conducted by the Ministry of Gender Equality of South Korea, the survey focused on married couples [10,11]. By holistically assessing various individual and environmental predictors of IPV among South Korean young adults, this study addressed an urgent need to inform future IPV prevention programs and their implementation.
Individual risk and protective factors
According to a Korean national study on domestic violence, the prevalence of IPV victimization was comparable among female and male adults in certain categories, such as neglect, coercive control, and emotional abuse. However, economic and physical IPV were generally infrequent but disproportionately affected women [1]. The 18 to 35 age group experienced the highest rates of IPV victimization among South Korean women [3]. A study examining gender-specific IPV experiences among Korean college students revealed no significant gender difference regarding physical and psychological IPV victimization and perpetration [12].
Prior literature has shown that education and a high level of family and personal life satisfaction are individual protective factors against IPV victimization and perpetration among both male and female South Korean adults [13]. A study conducted with South Korean college students revealed that those raised in a two-parent household were less likely to report psychological and physical IPV victimization and perpetration [12]. Having a higher monthly income (about 3,000 U.S. dollars or above) and a white-collar office job also reduced the rate of IPV victimization among Korean women [11,13]. However, neither female nor male college students who grew up in a wealthy family were less likely than others to experience either IPV victimization or perpetration [13].
Regarding individual behavioral risk factors, high rates of risky sexual behaviors and low self-control consistently emerged as determinants of IPV victimization and perpetration among South Korean college students [12,14,15]. In line with the self-control theory, individuals characterized by low self-control and limited self-regulation ability exhibited a higher propensity for subjecting their intimate partners to violent behaviors [16]. Among health behaviors, smoking was not associated with any types of IPV perpetration. However, a study found that alcohol intake was a high-risk factor for IPV perpetration among both male and female Korean adults [13]. A significant association was found between alcohol intake and IPV victimization among Korean males but not females [13].
Research on health risk factors associated with IPV among South Korean young adults has been limited. However, a study found that depressive symptoms were highly associated with psychological and physical IPV perpetration among Korean university students [17]. A review of studies conducted in the United States found that mental health symptoms (e.g., anxiety and depressive symptoms) were risk factors for dating violence victimization and perpetration, especially perpetration [18].
In terms of belief systems or attitudes, a study of South Korean college students found that those with progressive attitudes toward sex roles and a high level of sexual assertiveness were more likely to have a high awareness of dating violence than those without such attitudes [19]. A study of Korean adults aged 19 and up found that women who held positive attitudes toward traditional gender roles and acceptant attitudes of IPV reported higher incidence rates of IPV victimization and that men with those views were more likely to have perpetrated IPV [11]. The same study found that men whose beliefs normalized violence were more likely to engage in violent behaviors toward their parents as well. A study with Korean male university students found that those with acceptant attitudes toward dating violence and toward patriarchal gender roles were more likely to have committed IPV than others [20].
Environmental risk and protective factors
Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have been identified as environmental risk factors strongly related to IPV, and several studies have addressed this relationship among South Korean young adults (e.g., [17]). Among these, studies of college students have found that child maltreatment and witnessing parental IPV towards male and/or female caregivers in childhood increase the risk of IPV perpetration and victimization [1,13,21,22]. One study found that IPV victimization and perpetration rates were three times higher among participants who had witnessed parental IPV during childhood and that female adult IPV victims were twice as likely to have experienced childhood maltreatment than women who had not experienced IPV [11]. Rates of witnessing parental IPV toward male caregivers were significantly lower than rates of witnessing parental IPV toward female caregivers [14]. Moreover, the impact of witnessing parental IPV revealed gender differences toward their adult children. A study conducted in South Korea found that witnessing parental IPV directed at male caregivers had a positive association with IPV perpetration among male college students, while the association was negative for females. This means that for male students, those who observed IPV directed at their fathers were more likely to engage in IPV themselves. However, the effect was the opposite for female students, as witnessing such violence was associated with a lower likelihood of IPV perpetration. The observation of parental IPV towards male caregivers was significantly related to psychological perpetration among male college students and physical perpetration among females [12].
Studies explored mediation and moderation effects on the relationship between IPV and ACEs among South Korean college students. Beliefs that rationalize illegal behaviors mediated the association between experiences of child abuse, witnessing parental IPV, and perpetrating dating violence [21]. On the other side, witnessing parental conflict and guilt-proneness were both independently related to dating violence perpetration [22]. The sense of guilt moderated the effects of witnessing parental conflicts on emotional IPV perpetration [22]. This suggested that a heightened sense of guilt acted as a protective factor, reducing the likelihood that the witnessed parental conflict would translate into emotional aggression in dating relationships. These results underscored the significant role that beliefs and emotional responses play in the intergenerational transmission of violence, particularly within the context of IPV.
No study focusing on the South Korean young adult population has examined the impact of IPV training on IPV victimization and perpetration. However, U.S. studies have consistently found that bystander education and awareness-raising prevention programs are effective in changing attitudes and beliefs toward IPV (e.g., [23]). A study in South Korea reported that awareness of dating violence reduced the risk of female IPV victimization and male IPV perpetration [11]. Dating violence awareness was differed by gender; female Korean college students reported a higher level of dating violence recognition than their male counterparts [19].
Gaps in the literature
Prior studies on South Korean young adult intimate partner violence have provided adequate evidence of risk and protective factors across different levels. However, most studies have relied on convenience samples from large Korean universities (e.g., [20] or national surveys of married individuals, e.g., [11]). This approach may exclude young adults who are neither married nor enrolled in college, limiting diversity in terms of regions, backgrounds, and socioeconomic status. Furthermore, while prior research on traumatic events and IPV among the South Korean young adult population has predominantly centered on adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) [1,12,21,22], the inclusion of variables related to positive childhood family experiences can provide more comprehensive understanding of both protective and risk factors.
To gain a deeper understanding of how different types of traumatic childhood experiences influence intimate relationships in young adulthood, this study aims to identify lifelong correlates and preventive measures of IPV among South Korean young adults and their environments–findings which future work can translate into interventions and resources that help prevent IPV and mitigate its impact on IPV survivors. Specifically, these findings will provide new information on IPV experience among South Korean young adults that is necessary for developing a culturally tailored IPV prevention program.
Current study
The person-in-environment perspective [24,25] and cumulative life course adversity models [26,27] served as the conceptual framework for our study examining various individual and environmental risk and protective factors of IPV among South Korean young adults. While individual-level factors largely influence individuals’ thoughts and behaviors, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model advanced a more comprehensive approach to understanding humans’ growth and development within their physical and social environments [28]. Previous studies on IPV have suggested the need to integrate a multilevel approach when exploring the causes of violent behaviors and implementing intervention programs by identifying community- and environmental-level risk factors [24]. In addition, the cumulative life course adversity model demonstrates the traumatic experiences individuals have faced over their lifetimes and assumes that cumulative adversity influences an individual’s lifespan as a whole [27]. Research demonstrates a close connection between multilevel ACEs and exposure to IPV in adulthood (e.g., [29]). The current study also hypothesizes that this connection holds true for Korean young adults in the sample.
This study aims to answer the following research questions with respect to South Koreans aged 19 to 26: 1) What are their lifetime and the past 12-month IPV victimization and perpetration experiences? 2) What are the individual and environmental risk and protective factors affecting those experiences? The study hypothesizes that higher scores on individual factors such as traditional gender role attitude and substance use and lower scores on factors such as knowledge about IPV and health status would be associated with increased risk of IPV victimization and perpetration. The study also hypothesizes that higher scores on environmental factors of childhood adversities such as family neglect, witnessed IPV between caregivers, and experienced abuse and lower scores on family support will be associated with increased risk of IPV victimization and perpetration.
Methods
Design and sample
This study used a cross-sectional online survey design with a simple random sampling strategy and obtained survey data from N = 600 South Koreans aged 19 to 26 years old in February 2023. The sample size was determined and overestimated by predisposing a .05 effect size at .05 alpha level and .95 power by assuming 20 predictors to run regression models to test this study’s research questions. The sampling frame of this study was a panel (N = 255,929) recruited by an online data collection company in South Korea. The study invited eligible participants based on quota from the panel by eligible participants’ age categories (19–22 and 23–26), binary gender, and 16 regions using the January 2023 national population statistics (N = 4,763,272) published by the Korean Ministry of the Interior and Safety [30]. Our sampling frame consisted of about 5.4% of the population frame. An email invitation was sent to a total of 7,806 target participants, and the survey was closed once 600 complete responses had been received. The response rates were 7.7% of the participants who received the email and 49.1% of those who opened the email. Participants received 5,500 Korean won ($4.41) as an incentive at the completion of the survey. This study was approved by the institutional review board at the author’s institution in January 2023. Each participant reviewed and signed a written, online consent form by clicking a “submit” button before they took the online survey. The online electronic consent form was not documented. Respondents had the option to check “I wish not to respond” for all items related to IPV (CTS-2), childhood adverse experience, and their sexual orientation.
Measures
Lifetime IPV victimization and perpetration.
Lifetime IPV victimization and IPV perpetration were measured by the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) Short Form [31]. The IPV victimization and IPV perpetration measures consisted of 8 items each that asked about respondents’ lifetime experiences with physical injury (2 items each: e.g., “I had a sprain, bruise, or small cut, or felt pain the next day because of a fight with my partner” or “my partner had a sprain, bruise, or small cut or felt pain the next day because of a fight with me”), physical abuse (2 items each; e.g., “I pushed, shoved, or slapped my partner” or “my partner pushed, shoved, or slapped me”), psychological abuse (2 items each: e.g., “I insulted or swore or shouted or yelled at my partner” or “My partner insulted or swore or shouted or yelled at me), and sexual violence (2 items each; e.g., “I used force to make my partner have sex” or “my partner used force to make me have sex”) in any relationships with a former or current intimate partner. Items were designed as an 8-point scale that indicates the frequency of different types of IPV experience: 0 = this has never happened, 1 = once in the past 12 months, 2 = twice in the past 12 months, 3 = 3–5 times in the past 12 months, 4 = 6–10 times in the past 12 months, 5 = 11–20 times in the past 12 months, 6 = more than 20 times in the past 12 months, 7 = not in the past 12 months, but it did happen before.
Two authors who are bilingual in Korean and English translated the original English version of CTS short form into Korean and thoroughly examined translational accuracy and cultural sensitivity of the Korean CTS short form. Copyright of the use of the Korean CTS short form was obtained from Western Psychological Services. Cronbach’s alpha of IPV victimization and IPV perpetration for the current study were .90 and .91, respectively. Binary versions of the IPV victimization and IPV perpetration variables were created with respect to IPV in participants’ lifetime and in the past 12 months (0 = never experienced IPV or perpetrated it, 1 = ever experienced IPV victimization or perpetrated IPV). A binary variable was also created to measure having experienced IPV victimization and perpetrated it (0 = experienced neither or just one, victimization or perpetration, 1 = have both perpetrated IPV and experienced it).
Individual risk and protective factors.
The demographic independent variables collected in the survey were age, binary gender, sexual orientation, education level, monthly income, and the number of intimate partners in lifetime. Age, average monthly income in the past 12 months, and the number of intimate partners in lifetime were continuous variables. Gender and sexual orientation were categorized into binary values: 0 = male and 1 = female and 0 = heterosexual and 1 = non-heterosexual, including gay, bisexual, questioning or unsure, and other. Education level was assessed as 0 = high school graduates, 1 = in college, 2 = college graduates or higher.
Two attitude variables included attitudes towards IPV and attitude towards gender roles. This study measured attitudes towards IPV by borrowing items from the IPV Attitude Scales [32]. The scale consisted of 9 items using a 5-point Likert scale (0 = strongly disagree, 1 = somewhat disagree, 2 = neither agree nor disagree, 3 = somewhat agree, 4 = strongly agree). Example statements included “I would not like for my partner to ask me what I did every minute of the day” and “I would never try to keep my partner from doing things with other people.” Scores ranged from 0 to 36, and a higher score indicates greater knowledge about IPV.
Attitude towards gender roles was adopted from a Korean gender role scale used in the 2021 Violence Against Women Survey Study [2]. The scale consists of 10 items using a 4-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree, 3 = somewhat agree, 4 = strongly agree). Example items included “making money and doing household chores are work for people of any gender” and “men should be able to be financially responsible for their families” (which was reverse coded). We deleted two items that presented low factor loadings through principal factor analysis, and Cronbach alpha reliability of the final 8 items was .73. Scores range from 13 to 32, and a higher score indicates greater belief in equality in gender roles.
Two substance use variables measuring alcohol consumption and smoking were assessed by two items that were adopted from questions distributed by the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse: “In the past 12 months, how often have you used four (4) or more alcohol drinks” and “In the past 12 months, how often have you used tobacco products.” Responses were coded as 0 = “never,” 1 = “once or twice,” 2 = “monthly,” 3 = “weekly”, and 4 = “daily or almost daily.” Score ranges were between 0 and 4, and a higher score indicates that respondents engaged more frequently with alcohol or smoking.
Two health-related variables were assessed in the survey including mental health status and physical health status. Mental health status was evaluated using a 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). PHQ-9 measured the frequency of experiencing depressive symptoms over the last two weeks based on 4-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 1 = several days, 2 = more than half the days, and 3 = nearly every day). Scores range from 1 to 27. The Cronbach alpha reliability of PHQ-9 in this study was .88. Physical health was measured using five items adopted from the Short Form Health Survey using a 5-point Likert scale [33]. Example statements included “I am as healthy as anybody I know” and “my health is excellent” and a higher score indicated better perceived physical health (range: 5–25). Cronbach alpha of this scale was .84 in this study.
Environmental risk and protective factors.
Environmental risk factors included recent traumatic experience and adverse childhood experiences, including family neglect (8 items, Cronbach alpha = .89), witnessed IPV towards female caregiver (4 items, alpha = .94), witnessed IPV towards male caregiver (4 items, alpha = .92), experienced physical abuse (5 items, alpha = .94), and experienced sexual abuse (4 items, alpha = .89). Recent traumatic experience questions addressed seven experiences in the past 12 months such as divorce/separation, losing a job, and death of a loved one. The score ranges from 0 and 7 and a higher score indicates a higher level of recent traumatic experience. ACE measures asked about cumulative adversities that respondents had experienced before the age of 19 using the Kaiser Scale published by the Centers for Disease Control [34]. Answers to the items were categorized into 5-point responses (0 = never true, 4 = very often true), and higher scores in each variable indicated a higher frequency of experiencing each type of childhood adversities. The instruments’ Cronbach’s alphas were exceptional, ranging from .89 to .94.
Family support before 19 years of age and IPV training experience were assessed as environmental protective factors. Family support was measured using the Kaiser Scale [34]. Family support items (6 items) were asked following the family neglect items; they used a 5-point Likert Scale (0 = never true, 4 = very often true). Family support score ranged from 0 to 24 and a higher score indicated that the respondents experienced a higher level of family support. Cronbach’s alpha of family support was .89. IPV training experience was assessed by asking participants to indicate all types of training experiences focusing on dating, domestic, or intimate partner violence, sexual assault, healthy relationships, toxic relationship, and others. The number of training types were summed, and a higher score meant more types of educational experience related to IPV.
Data analyses
The study used descriptive statistics to explore participants’ individual and environmental characteristics that are potentially risk or protective factors associated with IPV victimization, IPV perpetration, and experiences both in the past 12 months and lifetime. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses examined the effects of participants’ individual and environmental factors of IPV victimization, IPV perpetration, and experience of both in participants’ lifetime. The first step included individual factors such as sociodemographic characteristics, attitude variables, substance use variables, and health variables. The second step was adding childhood protective and adverse environmental factors, traumatic events in the past 12 months, and IPV training experience. The independent variables in the regression models did not present multicollinearity issues. To conduct logistic regression analyses, R2 statistics were calculated following Nagelkerke’s pseudo R2 formula. All analyses were conducted using stats, Quantpsych, and rms packages in R 4.2.2.
Results
Participant characteristics
Sociodemographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 1. Respondents’ mean age was 22.85 years with men comprising 52.0% of respondents and 88.0% of respondents were heterosexual. Average monthly income in the past 12 months was 2,207,300 Korean won (about 1,689.74 U.S. dollars). The income sources that respondents reported (with the option to select more than one) were Employment or related work (64%), Gift from caregiver (63.5%), Scholarship (22.5%), Investment (18%), and Other (1.83%). Average score in the attitudes towards gender roles scale was 31.38, which can be interpreted that overall participants believe in gender equality (range: 18–40). The average score on the attitudes towards IPV scale was 27.49, indicating a generally high level of knowledge about IPV (range: 0–36). The average score on the depressive symptom scale was 5.26, indicating an average person experiencing mild depressive symptoms based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 clinical guideline.
Rates of intimate partner violence victimization and perpetration
The rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization, perpetration and co-experience (i.e., both victimization and perpetration) by IPV types are presented in Table 2. Over 23% of the study participants reported at least one incident of IPV victimization experience in the past 12 months and almost as many, 21.1% reported IPV perpetration experience in the same period. The participants who experienced both IPV victimization and perpetration was 17.6%. Lifetime IPV victimization, IPV perpetration, and co-experiences of IPV victimization and perpetration rates were 33.9%, 29.7%, and 24.0%, respectively. While lifetime IPV rates were higher than those in the past 12 months, at least 70% of the respondents who reported IPV in their lifetime reported experiencing it in the past 12 months. Psychological abuse victimization was the most common form, followed by physical abuse, sexual abuse, and physical injury, in both the past 12 months and in respondents’ lifetimes, and these results held true across victimization, perpetration, and co-experience of victimization and perpetration in psychological abuse, physical abuse, and injury. About one in four participants had experienced at least one incident of psychological abuse victimization or perpetration in their lifetime. While victimization and perpetration of psychological and physical abuse and physical injury were reported by similar portions of participants, twice as many participants reported sexual abuse victimization as sexual abuse perpetration, both in the past 12-month timelines and in the lifetime.
Individual and environmental risk and protective factors of lifetime IPV victimization
Table 3 presents the results of the two-step hierarchical logistic regression analysis that explored individual and environmental risk and protective factors of lifetime IPV victimization among South Korean young adults. Model 1 included (1) sociodemographic variables such as age, gender, sexual orientation, education level, monthly income, and the number of intimate partners, (2) attitude variables regarding gender roles and IPV, (3) substance use variables such as alcohol and smoking behavior, and (4) health variables such as depressive symptoms and physical health status. The model with individual characteristics accounted for 13.3% of the variance in lifetime IPV victimization (pseudo R2 = .13; p < .001). Respondents reported more depressive symptoms (B = .05; SE = .02; p < .05) and presented higher rates of lifetime IPV victimization. Other individual risk and protective factors such as age, gender, sexual orientation, attitudes variables, and substance use variables were not associated with the likelihood of IPV victimization.
Model 2 added environmental risk and protective variables such as adverse childhood experiences, IPV training, and recent traumatic events. Results indicated these variables accounted for 17.7% of the variance of lifetime IPV victimization (pseudo R2 = .18; p < .001). Model 2 was statistically significant and the R2 increased 4.4% of the variance (ΔpseudoR2 = .044) over that of Model 1. However, none of the individual and environmental risk and protective factors in model 2 were associated with lifetime IPV victimization.
Individual and environmental risk and protective factors of IPV perpetration
Table 4 displays the results of the two-step hierarchical logistic regression analysis that explored individual and environmental risk and protective factors of lifetime IPV perpetration. Model 1 included identical individual variables to the model analyzing predictors of lifetime IPV victimization above: sociodemographic variables, attitude variables regarding gender roles and IPV, substance use variables, and health variables. The model with individual characteristics accounted for 21% of the variance in lifetime IPV perpetration (pseudoR2 = .21; p < .001). Respondents who presented traditional norms on gender roles (B = -.09; SE = .03; p < .01), who held higher myths on IPV (B = -.05; SE = .02; p < .05), who consumed more alcohol (B = .21; SE = .09; < .05) and who reported poorer physical health (B = -.09; SE = .03; p < .01) were more likely to have experienced IPV perpetration. On the other hand, age, gender, sexual orientation, education level, income, the number of intimate partners, tobacco use, and depressive symptoms were not associated with the likelihood of IPV perpetration.
Model 2 added environmental risk and protective variables such as adverse childhood experiences, IPV training, and recent traumatic events. It accounted for 23% of the variance of lifetime IPV perpetration (pseudo R2 = .23; p < .001). Model 2 was statistically significant and the R2 increased 2.1% of the variance (ΔpseudoR2 = .02) compared to Model 1. In Model 2, among the individual characteristics, traditional views about gender roles (B = -.08; SE = .03; p < .05), alcohol use (B = .21; SE = .10; p < .05), and poorer physical health (B = -.09; SE = .03; p < .01) were positively associated were associated with IPV perpetration. Among environmental factors, family neglect (B = -.04; SE = .02; p < .05) was negatively associated with IPV perpetration.
Discussion
Based on a nationally representative South Korean young adult sample by their age, gender, and region, this study found that about three in 10 Korean young adults had experienced at least one incidence of IPV victimization and perpetration in their lifetime. About one in four of them had experienced both. The incidence rates supported the previous understandings of the magnitude of IPV and that Korean young adults face heightened risks of IPV in their 20 [1,2]. Lifetime IPV rates in this study were higher than rates of IPV victimization (physical abuse: 12% and emotional abuse: 17.3%) and perpetration (physical abuse: 4.1% and emotional abuse 21.2%) that were reported by Korean men aged 19 to 89 in the 2010 National Survey of Domestic Violence [1]. Co-experience of IPV victimization and perpetration among young adults in this study was also consistent with high chance of mutual violence or bidirectional violence among young adults across the culture [9,35–37]. To address the risk of co-experiencing IPV victimization and perpetration, IPV programs tailored to address both unidirectional and bidirectional IPV for young adult men and women are essential.
In this study, environmental risk factors that were measured by various types of ACEs minimally explain IPV victimization and perpetration among Korean young adults by disconfirming previous knowledge of strong connections between ACEs and IPV. For examples, in young adult or college student samples, intergenerational transmission of IPV by witnessing parental IPV or experiencing abuse by a caregiver [29] and revictimization of IPV among trauma survivors with sexual violence victimization experience in their childhood [38] have been found and supported across cross cultural contexts. Moreover, among Korean young adults, witnessed IPV between caregivers and direct experience with maltreatment were the most important risk factors of both IPV victimization and perpetration [11,13,14]. One speculation about the minimal connections between ACEs and IPV in this study is that it was related to the role of attitudes towards IPV or other belief systems in mediating the associations between ACEs and IPV. A scoping review of 32 studies reviewed the relationships between ACEs and IPV in adulthood including a mediating role of attitudes towards IPV or belief systems [39]. In two reviewed studies, attitudes towards IPV and belief systems in relationships (e.g., fear of abandonment and internalization of emotional deprivation) mediated the relationships between ACEs (e.g., witnessing and experiencing parental and community level violence) and IPV victimization and perpetration among emerging adult samples [40,41]. Yet, these mediating roles were only confirmed regarding cyber abuse in the U.S. context. Existing studies based on Korean young adult samples are outdated and did not examine such a mediating role specific to IPV. This is an explorative study; future studies are needed to explore the mediating mechanisms of individual attitudes and beliefs in relationships on the connections between ACEs and IPV.
Family neglect was the only variable that explained IPV perpetration. Yet, the finding contradicted the hypothesis: a greater experience with family neglect in childhood decreased the likelihood of IPV perpetration in this sample. This finding also contradicted prior evidence that indicated a positive relationship between family neglect experience and IPV perpetration [17] or statistically insignificant relationships between them [42]. Growing up in a family environment where physical and emotional neglect occurred or were severe influenced lack of self-esteem young adults [43], and low self-esteem has been closely associated with elevated risks of IPV victimization [44,45] and IPV perpetration [46,47] in research with broader age ranges. The negative association between family neglect and IPV perpetration in Korean young adults in this study needs further assessment.
As a protective environmental factor of IPV, family support in childhood had no link to IPV in Korean young adults in this study. However, a lack of previous studies about IPV in adulthood’s connection to family support makes it more complicated to meaningfully discuss the finding. A few studies that examined both risk and protective factor of IPV in adulthood have investigated community-level support [48,49] or childhood parental factors such as educational level and income [50]. It has been shown, however, that a nurturing and supportive family environment via warm parenting and child development knowledge mitigates the impact of violence exposure on children and youth [51,52]. Future research should further investigate the effect of family support on IPV, especially given IPV is a critical adverse experience among young adults.
Apart from family neglect, there were individual factors linked to higher chances of IPV victimization or perpetration. For example, greater depressive symptoms were significantly associated with IPV victimization. Depressive is a primary mental health issue that young adult IPV survivors’ report [53]. In previous studies, mental health was associated with IPV victimization for both young adult men and women, and this association was much more illuminated than the association between physical health and IPV perpetration [54–56]. As only one prior study explored the association between depressive symptoms and IPV among Korean young adults, and the only statistically significant result was on IPV perpetration, and only among college students [17], this study’s findings of the relationship between mental health and IPV victimization added significance to our understanding of the need to support Korean young adults’ mental health.
Regarding risk factors of IPV perpetration, attitude variables, both traditional mindset with respect to gender roles and a lack of awareness of IPV predicted IPV perpetration, as did poor physical health. These findings highlighted the crucial roles of personal values and norms in determining IPV among young adults. Previous studies with Korean college student samples revealed that less belief in a rigid gender binary and more egalitarian attitudes towards gender roles decreased the risk of IPV victimization and perpetration [19,57]. This study’s findings with respect to non-permissive attitudes towards IPV aligned with research on single Korean men aged 19–59 years, which showed that their attitude towards IPV was a more crucial determinant of IPV perpetration than personality variables such as self-esteem and borderline personality [58]. Consistent with these previous findings, this study’s findings underscored that helping Korean young adults reconsider their assumptions about gender roles and IPV might be an effective way to prevent IPV perpetration.
This study also found a link between alcohol consumption and IPV perpetration among Korean young adults. These findings aligned with past research showing that alcohol consumption increased IPV perpetration among Korean adult men and women [13] and frequent (more than once a week) and problematic drinking of alcohol was associated with IPV perpetration among Korean college students [59]. Alcohol consumption seems to explain IPV perpetration more than IPV victimization as it explained IPV perpetration for both genders among Korean men and women, but it only explained victimization among Korean men [13] and it did not predict IPV victimization in U.S. college women [60]. Yet, alcohol use predicted sexual abuse victimization among college women [60]. Alcohol drinking, including heavy alcohol drinking, is socially accepted in Korean culture, and until the legal systems provides leniency for crimes conducted under feeble minded conditions, a term often meaning under the influence of alcohol. Other kinds of intoxicants are unusual in Korea. Until 2018, this leniency was unconditional, and a judge could still grant it under the latest law [61]. This study’s findings, along with those of prior research, suggest that this policy may be harmful and perpetuate IPV; IPV prevention approaches should address perpetrator accountability concerning the influence of alcohol and foster dialogue about ensuring safety in intimate relationships by managing problematic alcohol drinking.
Indeed, the findings of this study have practical, research, and policy implications for efforts to prevent IPV among Korean young adults, one of the groups most vulnerable to both victimization and perpetration. For health care practitioners, recognizing and supporting young adult IPV survivors’ needs and addressing their mental health challenges will be beneficial. Development and implementation of IPV prevention programs that address individual risk factors such as alcohol consumption and attitudes towards IPV and about gender roles in institutions of higher education, workplaces, and the military, all of which bring Korean young adults together, have the potential to prevent IPV perpetration. Yet further research is needed to investigate determinants of attitudes towards IPV and toward gender roles to identify interventions to foster non-permissive attitudes about IPV and egalitarian attitudes about gender as part of IPV prevention. Future research also needs to investigate how these adults’ attitudes towards IPV and towards gender roles potentially mediate the relationships between ACEs and IPV. In addition, evidence-based IPV prevention programs that intervene in beliefs or attitudes towards IPV and gender roles among Korean young adults are vital. Replication studies examining the role of environmental risk factors centering on adverse childhood experiences are also needed to support this study’s findings. To address identified risk and protective factors and make IPV prevention feasible, funding support from national to local government offices is vital to address individual risk factors of IPV victimization and perpetration via various levels of prevention efforts (e.g., primary, secondary, tertiary prevention). Legislative reassessment about leniency toward. People who have committed criminal acts “under the influence of alcohol” will be helpful to ensure IPV perpetrator accountability.
Limitations and strengths
The sampling of this study was well planned to represent the target population. The study used a random sampling strategy considering quota of age, binary gender, and region based on the quota of these characteristics in the population frame. Dominance of female samples has been a chronic issue in IPV research [62], and this study obtained male respondents that are representative of the population. Yet, the study’s findings may be still biased as the study participants voluntarily registered as subjects of the online survey, and their response quality might be less to control compared to conducting survey by a trained interviewer. Response rates of the participants were good or excellent as 49.1% of the participants who opened the invitation email completed the survey. The current study initially invited 3,000 people (five times the target sample size). Considering the high response rate and quick responses (target sample size was reached in a few days), inviting a smaller number (e.g., three times the target sample size instead of five times) would have helped us include dropped responses after reaching the target sample size. This study defined young adults as being aged 19–26 [63]. Traditionally, these emerging adults were expected to “become financially independent, to establish romantic relationships, and become parents” [64], but diversity in relationship status in the study’s sample was very low due to changing social norms about these transitions, delays in marriage, and emphasis on education during this developmental stage. This study may not illuminate the experiences of married Korean young adults because they were underrepresented in the sample given the sample’s age.
Conclusion
This study revealed that about one in three Korean young adults ages 19–26 had ever experienced IPV victimization or IPV perpetration within, on average, 3.6 intimate relationships. Using person-in-environment and life course perspective of cumulative adversities, the study identified depressive symptoms as a factor explaining lifetime IPV victimization and other individual factors such as attitudes about gender roles and IPV, alcohol consumption, and physical health that predicted IPV perpetration. No associations between most of the environmental risk factors such as witnessing parental IPV or abuse experience and IPV were contradictory to previous findings (e.g., [11]) that underscore intergenerational transmission of IPV and long-term adverse health effect of IPV among young adults. This study’s findings highlight the importance of addressing Korean young adults’ IPV via diverse prevention program approaches including gender inclusive programs, mental health supporting programs for IPV survivors, and culturally tailored IPV prevention programs and evaluation research that promote equality in gender role and awareness of IPV and knowledge of the potential impact of alcohol use in intimate relationships.
References
- 1. Ferraresso R. Risk and protective factors associated with intimate partner violence in a nationally representative sample of Korean men. J Prev Med Public Health. 2020 Mar;53(2):135–142. pmid:32268468
- 2. Jang MH, Kim HJ, Jeong YJ, Park SM, Jeong DE, Jeong JY, et al. 2021 Violence against women study. no.11-1383000-000478-12, Korean Ministry of Gender Equality and Family Seoul. 2021. Available from: http://www.mogef.go.kr/mp/pcd/mp_pcd_s001d.do?mid=plc504&bbtSn=704373.
- 3. An JH, Moon CS, Kim DE, Lee-Tauler SY, Jeon HJ, Cho SJ, et al. Prevalence of intimate partner violence victimization and its association with mental disorders in the Korean general population. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2019;22(6):751–758. pmid:31377864
- 4. Johnson WL, Giordano PC, Manning WD, Longmore MA. The age-IPV curve: Changes in the perpetration of intimate partner violence during adolescence and young adulthood. J Youth Adolesc. 2015;44(3):708–26. pmid:25081024
- 5. Smith SG. Zhang X, Basile KC, Merrick MT, Wang J, Kresnow M, et al. The national intimate partner and sexual violence survey (NISVS): 2015 Data brief–updated release. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. 2018. Available from: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/60893.
- 6. An S, Welch-Brewer C, Tadese H. Scoping review of intimate partner violence prevention programs for undergraduate college students. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2024;25(4):3099–3114. pmid:38533852
- 7. Duval A, Lanning BA, Patterson MS. A systematic review of dating violence risk factors among undergraduate college students. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2018;21(3):567–85. pmid:29911506
- 8. Storer HL, Casey E, Herrenkohl T. Efficacy of bystander programs to prevent dating abuse among youth and young adults: A review of the literature. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2016;17(3):256–69. pmid:25951840
- 9.
Framework Act on Prevention of Violence Against Women, Statutes of the Republic of Korea, Act No. 16086. Ministry of Government Legislation; 2018 Dec 24. Available from: https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_mobile/viewer.do?hseq=52505&type=new&key=.
- 10. Arenas-Carbellido C, Arias Astray A, Emery CR. Dating violence heterogeneity in university couples: The cases of Spain and South Korea. Soc Work Public Health. 2020;35(6):368–379. pmid:32543330
- 11. Han Y, Choi HY. Risk factors affecting intimate partner violence occurrence in South Korea: Findings from the 2016 Domestic Violence Survey. PLoS One. 2021;16(3):e0247916. pmid:33662016
- 12. Gover AR, Park MR, Tomsich EA, Jennings WG. Dating violence perpetration and victimization among South Korean college students: A focus on gender and childhood maltreatment. J Interpers Violence. 2011;26(6):1232–63. pmid:20498382
- 13. Lee M, Stefani KM, Park E-C. Gender-specific differences in risk for intimate partner violence in South Korea. BMC Public Health. 2014;14(1):415. pmid:24885985
- 14. Gover AR, Jennings WG, Thomsich EA, Park M, Rennison CM. The influence of childhood maltreatment and self-control on dating violence: A comparison of college students in the United States and South Korea. Violence Vict. 2011;26(3):296–318. pmid:21846019
- 15. Jennings WG, Park M, Tomsich EA, Gover AR, Akers RL. Assessing the overlap in dating violence perpetration and victimization among South Korean college students: The influence of social learning and self-control. Amer J Crim Justice. 2011;36(2):188–206.
- 16. Finkel EJ, DeWall CN, Slotter EB, Oaten M, Foshee VA. Self-regulatory failure and intimate partner violence perpetration. J Personal and Soc Psychol. 2009;97(3):483. pmid:19686003
- 17. Kang H, Lee E. Predictive factors for perpetrations of dating violence in university students. J Korean Acad Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2014;23(4):288.
- 18. Kaukinen C. Dating violence among college students: The risk and protective factors. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2014;15(4):283–96. pmid:24499962
- 19. Kim Y, Lee E, Lee H. Sexual double standard, dating violence recognition, and sexual assertiveness among university students in South Korea. Asian Nurs Res. 2019;13(1):47–52. pmid:30639865
- 20. You S, Shin K. Influence of patriarchal sex-role attitudes on perpetration of dating violence. Curr Psychol. 2022;41(2):943–48.
- 21. Kim JY, Kim HJ, Choi JW, Emery C. Family violence and dating violence in Korea. J Fam Violence. 2014;29(1):23–33.
- 22. Nam Y, Maxwell SR. Assessing the effects of witnessed parental conflict and guilt on dating violence perpetration among South Korean college students. J Fam Violence. 2021;36:293–305.
- 23. Peterson K, Sharps P, Banyard V, Powers RA, Kaukinen C, Gross D, et al. An evaluation of two dating violence prevention programs on a college campus. J Interpers Violence. 2018;33(23):3630–3655. pmid:26976433
- 24. Assari S. Multilevel approach to intimate partner violence research and prevention. Int J Prev Med. 2013;4(5):616–617. pmid:23930176
- 25. Monkman MM. Outcome objectives in social work practice: Person and Environment. Soc Work. 1991;36(3):253–58. pmid:2057810
- 26. Dangerfield DT II, Smith LR, Anderson JN, Bruce OJ, Farley J, Bluthenthal R. Sexual positioning practices and sexual risk among Black gay and bisexual men: A life course perspective. AIDS Behav. 2018;22:1919–31. pmid:29079948
- 27. Jones TM, Nurius P, Song C, Fleming CM. Modeling life course pathways from adverse childhood experiences to adult mental health. Child Abuse Negl. 2018;80:32–40. pmid:29567455
- 28.
Bronfenbrenner U. The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1979.
- 29. Zhu J, Exner-Cortens D, Dobson K, Wells L, Noel M, Madigan S. Adverse childhood experiences and intimate partner violence: A meta-analysis. Dev Psychopathol. 2023;1–15. pmid:37009672
- 30.
Korean Ministry of the Interior and Safety. Korean population statistics. The Ministry. 2023 Jan. Available from: https://jumin.mois.go.kr/.
- 31. Straus MA, Douglas EM. A short form of the revised Conflict Tactics Scales, and typologies for severity and mutuality. Violence Vict. 2004;19(5):507–20. pmid:15844722
- 32. Smith BA, Thompson S, Tomaka J, Buchanan AC. Dev Intimate Partner Violence Attitude Scales (IPVAS) with a predominantly Mexican American college sample. Hisp J Behav Sci. 2005;27(4):442–54.
- 33. McHorney CA, Ware JE, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care. 1993 Mar;31(3):247–63. pmid:8450681
- 34.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About the CDC-Kaiser ACE study. 2021 Apr. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/aces/about.html.
- 35.
An S, Choi Y. IPV victimization and perpetuation among Black college students. Symposium paper presented at: 22nd Annual Conference of the Society for Social Work and Research; 2018 Jan 12; Washington, DC.
- 36. Renner LM, Whitney SD. Risk factors for unidirectional and bidirectional intimate partner violence among young adults. Child Abuse Negl. 2012 Jan;36(1):40–52. pmid:22269774
- 37. Hu R, Xue J, Lin K, Sun IY, Wang X. Bidirectional intimate partner violence among Chinese women: patterns and risk factors. J Interpers Violence. 2021;36(21–22):NP12252–78. pmid:31795808
- 38. Cprek SE, Fisher BS, McDonald MJ, McDaniel HM, Williamson L, Williams CM. Adverse childhood experiences and interpersonal violence among college students: Does a relationship exist? J Am College Health. 2021;69(8):913–20. pmid:31995457
- 39. Navarro R, Larrañaga E, Yubero S, Víllora B. Associations between adverse childhood experiences within the family context and in-person and online dating violence in adulthood: A scoping review. Behav Sci. 2022;12(6):162. pmid:35735372
- 40. Baller S.L., Lewis K. Adverse childhood experiences, intimate partner violence, and communication quality in a college-aged sample. J Fam Issues. 2022 May;12(6):162.
- 41. Cano-Gonzalez I., Charak R., Gilbar O., Viñas-Racionero R., Strait M.K. Witnessing parental violence and cyber IPV perpetration in Hispanic emerging adults: The mediating role of attitudes toward IPV. J Interpers Violence. 2022;37:NP8115–NP8137. pmid:33246379
- 42. Widom CS, Czaja S, Dutton MA. Child abuse and neglect and intimate partner violence victimization and perpetration: a prospective investigation. Child Abuse Negl. 2014;38(4):650–63. pmid:24325940
- 43. Xiang Y, Wang W, Guan F. The relationship between child maltreatment and dispositional envy and the mediating effect of self-esteem and social support in young adults. Front Psychol. 2018;9:1054. pmid:30079038
- 44. Dhouib H, Omri S, Daoud M, Amar W, Smaoui N, Feki R, et al. Intimate partner violence and self-esteem. Eur Psychiatry. 2021;64(S1):S836.
- 45. Soldevilla JM, Feixas G, Varlotta N, Cirici R. Characteristics of the construct systems of women victims of intimate partner violence. J Constr Psychol. 2014;27(2):105–19.
- 46. Lee S, Nam JS. Effects of low self-esteem based on experiences of child abuse on aggressiveness. Korean Crim Psychol Rev. 2016;12(3):87–112. https://uci.kci.go.kr/ G704-SER000010388.2016.12.3.001.
- 47.
Schmidt M. The role of attachment, self-esteem and impulsivity on intimate partner violence in same- and opposite-sex relationships. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Tennessee. 2020. Available from: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/6822.
- 48. Curtis A, Harries T, Pizzirani B, Hyder S, Baldwin R, Mayshak R, et al. Childhood predictors of adult intimate partner violence perpetration and victimization. J Fam Viol. 2023; 38: 1591–1606.
- 49.
CDC. Risk and protective factors of perpetration. 2021 Nov 2. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/riskprotectivefactors.html.
- 50. Yakubovich AR, Stöckl H, Murray J, Melendez-Torres GJ, Steinert JI, Glavin CEY et al. Risk and protective factors for intimate partner violence against women: Systematic review and meta-analyses of prospective-longitudinal studies. Am J Public Health. 2018 Jul;108(7):e1–e11. pmid:29771615
- 51.
CDC. Risk and protective factors. 2023 Jun 29. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/aces/riskprotectivefactors.html.
- 52. Spearman KJ, Hoppe E, Jagasia E. A systematic literature review of protective factors mitigating intimate partner violence exposure on early childhood health outcomes. J Adv Nurs. 2023;79(5):1664–1677. pmid:36938995
- 53. Voth Schrag RJ, Edmond TE. Intimate partner violence, trauma, and mental health need among female community college students. J Am College Health. 2018;66(7):702–11. pmid:29672245
- 54. Coker AL, Davis KE, Arias I, Desai S, Sanderson M, Brandt HM, et al. Physical and mental health effects of intimate partner violence for men and women. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(4):260–68. pmid:12406480
- 55. Seon J, Cho H, Choi G, Son E, Allen J, Nelson A, et al. Adverse childhood experiences, intimate partner violence victimization, and self-perceived health and depression among college students. J Fam Violence. 2022;37:691–706.
- 56. Spencer CM, Keilholtz BM, Palmer M, Vail SL. Mental and physical health correlates for emotional intimate partner violence perpetration and victimization: a meta-analysis. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2024;25(1):41–53. pmid:36458866
- 57. Lee E, Kang H. A study on university students’ gender role stereotype, sexual assertiveness, sexual assault recognition, sexual violence permissiveness and sexual violence experience in dating. J East-West Nurs Res. 2014;20(1):48–56.
- 58. Hong S, Han MK. Typologies of male adults based on personality characteristics and attitudes towards violence and the differences in dating violence: a latent profile analysis. Korean Criminol Rev. 2021;32(4):1–32.
- 59. Suh K. Motivation for alcohol use, problem drinking, family alcohol use and dating violence among college students. Korean Psychol J Cult Soc Issues. 2003;9(2):61–78. https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART000868198.
- 60. Dardis CM, Ullman SE, Rodriguez LM, Waterman EA, Dworkin ER, Edwards KM. Bidirectional associations between alcohol use and intimate partner violence and sexual assault victimization among college women. Addict Behav. 2021;116:106833. pmid:33516041
- 61.
Criminal Act, Statutes of the Republic of Korea, Act No.11731-10. Ministry of Government Legislation; 2013 Apr 5. Available from: https://www.law.go.kr/LSW/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=138767&viewCls=engLsInfoR&urlMode=engLsInfoR&chrClsCd=010203#0000.
- 62. Scott-Storey K, O’Donnell S, Ford-Gilboe M, Varcoe C, Wathen N, Malcolm J, et al. (2023). What about the men? a critical review of men’s experiences of intimate partner violence. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2023;24(2):858–872. pmid:35094633
- 63.
Arnett JJ. Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.
- 64.
Bonnie RJ, Stroud C, Breiner H. Introduction. In: Bonnie RJ, Stroud C, Breiner H, editors. Investing in the health and well-being of young adults: Washington: National Academies Press; 2015. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK284791/.