Measuring Physical and Sexual Intimate Partner Violence Experiences: Comparison of Indirect and Direct Methods in Kenya

Intimate partner violence (IPV) threatens women’s health; hence, accurate measurement is critical. Indirect questioning via list experiments or item-count methods offers added privacy and may minimize underreporting. However, less is known about participants’ ability to answer item counts and, critically, how indirect assessment compares with direct methods. To advance these questions, our list experiment adaptation entails indirect lists (with and without the IPV question for item-count comparison) and direct questioning, for sexual and physical IPV experience separately. By not constraining item-count responses, we assess list experiment numerical comprehension. The study aims to examine (a) numerical comprehension for indirect assessment and (b) the difference in past-year IPV prevalence estimation generated via indirect versus direct measures. A 2024 cross-sectional survey with partnered women was conducted across four Kenyan counties ( n = 3,323). Numerical comprehension was indicated by a non-plausible difference in the five-item and four-item lists (>1 or <0). Among comprehenders, IPV prevalence was estimated using direct and indirect methods, with the difference in prevalence estimation assessed overall and by sociodemographic sub-groups. List experiment comprehension was compromised for 12.8% and 10.1% of women, for physical and sexual IPV, respectively. The prevalence of past-year physical and/or sexual IPV was 22.2% as assessed by direct and 36.7% as assessed by indirect methods, resulting in a difference of 14.5 percentage points. Indirect methods produced higher IPV prevalence estimates across all sociodemographic sub-groups, suggesting that direct methods may risk underestimation. Results highlight numeracy as a limitation in list experiments, particularly for vulnerable sub-populations. List experiments can also be cumbersome and limited in their breadth. Ultimately, direct IPV estimation remains a best practice for population surveys, acknowledging risk for underestimation. Indirect methods can validate direct IPV estimation on a limited set of experiences and add value where privacy issues constrain direct methods.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Published
2026-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605261478106
Primary Topic
Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measuring Physical and Sexual Intimate Partner Violence Experiences: Comparison of Indirect and Direct Methods in Kenya

Michele R. Decker, Shannon N. Wood, Salma Tayel, Anaise Williams et al.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
article

Measuring Physical and Sexual Intimate Partner Violence Experiences: Comparison of Indirect and Direct Methods in Kenya

Michele R. Decker, Shannon N. Wood, Salma Tayel, Anaise Williams, Nicole Stamas, Mary Thiong'o, Peter Gichangi, Grace Ngare
article en

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) threatens women’s health; hence, accurate measurement is critical. Indirect questioning via list experiments or item-count methods offers added privacy and may minimize underreporting. However, less is known about participants’ ability to answer item counts and, critically, how indirect assessment compares with direct methods. To advance these questions, our list experiment adaptation entails indirect lists (with and without the IPV question for item-count comparison) and direct questioning, for sexual and physical IPV experience separately. By not constraining item-count responses, we assess list experiment numerical comprehension. The study aims to examine (a) numerical comprehension for indirect assessment and (b) the difference in past-year IPV prevalence estimation generated via indirect versus direct measures. A 2024 cross-sectional survey with partnered women was conducted across four Kenyan counties ( n = 3,323). Numerical comprehension was indicated by a non-plausible difference in the five-item and four-item lists (>1 or <0). Among comprehenders, IPV prevalence was estimated using direct and indirect methods, with the difference in prevalence estimation assessed overall and by sociodemographic sub-groups. List experiment comprehension was compromised for 12.8% and 10.1% of women, for physical and sexual IPV, respectively. The prevalence of past-year physical and/or sexual IPV was 22.2% as assessed by direct and 36.7% as assessed by indirect methods, resulting in a difference of 14.5 percentage points. Indirect methods produced higher IPV prevalence estimates across all sociodemographic sub-groups, suggesting that direct methods may risk underestimation. Results highlight numeracy as a limitation in list experiments, particularly for vulnerable sub-populations. List experiments can also be cumbersome and limited in their breadth. Ultimately, direct IPV estimation remains a best practice for population surveys, acknowledging risk for underestimation. Indirect methods can validate direct IPV estimation on a limited set of experiences and add value where privacy issues constrain direct methods.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Johns Hopkins University (US), Kenyatta University (KE), Ghent University Hospital (BE), Technical University of Mombasa (KE), Center for Health and Gender Equity (US), International Centre for Reproductive Health Kenya (KE)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.