Couple Religiosity, Male Headship, Intimate Partner Violence, and Infidelity

Bibliographic Data

ID4232845
AuthorsLaurie F Derose (0000-0002-2608-8106, Catholic University of America, corresponding author), Bryan R Johnson (0000-0002-3337-3810, Baylor University and the Sagamore Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA), Byron R Johnson, Wendy Wang (0009-0007-8630-2796, Institute for Family Studies, Charlottesville, VA, USA), Andrés Salazar-Arango (0000-0001-9208-1896, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Cundinamarca, Colombia)
Year2021
Volume63
Issue4
Pages607-627
Publication date2021-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueReview of Religious Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2211-4866 • E-ISSN: 0034-673X
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s13644-021-00461-2
OpenAlexW3173245378
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited27

Background The research literature finds a positive relationship between couple religiosity and relationship quality, but because public discourse highlights religious victims of domestic violence, we questioned whether couple religiosity prevents negative relationship outcomes as well as it promotes positive ones. Purpose This article compares rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) and infidelity among couples with different levels of religious commitment. We further interrogated whether the belief that the man is the head of the household increased couples' risk of IPV or infidelity. Methods We used Global Family and Gender Survey data from eleven countries. This was an online survey of adults ages 18 to 50 that used a representative panel for the United States, but used opt-in panels in Australia, France, Ireland, United Kingdom, Canada, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru. We limited our analytic sample to the 9920 men and women in heterosexual relationships (6791 married and 3128 cohabiting). We also analyzed the United States probability sample separately from our pooled sample. Results Couples with nominal or unequal religiosity ( less/mixed religious couples) had higher rates of infidelity than either highly religious couples or couples in which neither partner exhibited much religiosity ( shared secular couples). Infidelity was generally similar between highly religious couples and shared secular couples, but in the US women in highly religious couples did cheat less. We found no differences in IPV-measured by both women's reports of victimization and men's reports of perpetration-according to couple religiosity. Further, the belief that the man is the head of the household did not influence couples' risk of either IPV or infidelity across the entire sample. In Latin America, however, patriarchal men in shared secular couples perpetrated IPV significantly more often than their egalitarian or more religious counterparts. Conclusions and Implications Our Latin American evidence hints that patriarchy may be a more dangerous ideology for secular couples than for religious couples. Our more general conclusion is that even though negative relationship outcomes are not more common among religious couples, the resources religious traditions have at their disposal to discourage violence within intimate partnerships seem tragically underutilized

Domestic violence · Poison control · Religiosity · Sociology · Suicide prevention · Demography · Intimate Partner and Family Violence · Marriage and Sexual Relationships · Medicine · Psychology · Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access