A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Responsivity to Interviewer during Interview-Based Assessment of Physical Intimate Partner Violence. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: Interview assessments of intimate partner violence (IPV) may provide more accurate behavior frequency estimates than self-report questionnaires. However, concerns have been raised about whether participants underreport IPV during interviews due to an emotional response to the interviewer.

Method: Participants were 42 mixed gender community couples (83 individuals) in which at least one partner endorsed physical IPV perpetration or victimization in their relationship. We examined whether participants were emotionally responsive to the interviewer during an interview about physical IPV. Responsivity was defined as the extent to which participants' emotional arousal, indexed by vocal fundamental frequency (f), was predicted by interviewers' emotional arousal at the previous talk turn on a moment-by-moment basis. We then examined whether participants' responsivity predicted interview-based reporting of IPV relative to their own self-report on an IPV measure and to the highest other available report (including partner report).

Results: Repeated measures actor-partner interdependence models conducted in a multi-level modeling framework indicated that, on average, participants were responsive to interviewers' emotional arousal, even when controlling for responsivity to their own arousal, and that responsivity varied across participants. However, participants' responsivity to interviewer arousal did not significantly predict reporting of IPV perpetration or victimization during the interview relative to their own self-report or to the highest other available report.

Conclusions: Participants are emotionally responsive to interviewer arousal, but this responsivity does not appear to reduce interview-based reporting of IPV relative to self-report, supporting the utility of IPV interviews in clinical and research settings.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11178289PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/vio0000482DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

emotional arousal
12
reporting ipv
12
relative self-report
12
ipv
9
responsivity interviewer
8
intimate partner
8
partner violence
8
ipv interviews
8
physical ipv
8
ipv perpetration
8

Similar Publications