Intimate Partner Violence Among College Students: The Influence of Gender, Sexual Orientation, Race/Ethnicity on Bystander Intention

Intimate partner violence (IPV) among college students is an issue across gender, sexual orientation, and race/ethnicity. The present study highlights the sociodemographic characteristics that influence physical IPV involvement among college students by reporting past year prevalence and frequency rates of physical IPV involvement by gender, sexual orientation, and race/ethnicity. Additionally, the current study builds on research about bystander intention to intervene by exploring the influence of these sociodemographic characteristics on participants intentions to intervene, as well as their preferred type of intervention. Participants were 525 university students recruited from the psychology research pool. They were presented with eight hypothetical vignettes that depicted physical IPV involving same-gender and opposite-gender couples, White/Caucasian and Black/African American couples, and women and men as both perpetrators and victims. After each scenario, participants answered three questions about perceived seriousness and intention to intervene. One-third of participants who were in relationships reported past year physical IPV, with the most common pattern of physical IPV reported as bidirectional violence. Results revealed comparable rates of past year physical IPV involvement across heterosexual and LGBQ+ participants but higher past year rates among Black/African American participants. Results showed clear gender differences in perceived seriousness ratings of depicted physical IPV scenarios dependent on participant and victim gender such that opposite-gender, male-against female IPV was perceived as more serious, particular among female participants. Many significant findings were revealed pertaining to the individual sociodemographic characteristics on participant intention to intervene and preferred intervention type. Specifically, (1) male participants reported lower intention to intervene across all vignette types; (2) participants reported more intention to intervene when the victim was female; (3) participants reported lower intention to intervene when the couple depicting the physical IPV scenario was same-gender; (4) male participants were more likely to report direct methods of intervention (e.g., confronting the perpetrator), whereas female participants were more likely to report indirect methods (e.g., call the police) of intervention. Practical implications highlight the need for educational bystander prevention and intervention efforts to present a more culturally inclusive and accurate representation of IPV on college campuses enhance the impact prevention and intervention efforts across college campuses.