The Development of a Domestic Violence Perpetrator Collusion Measurement Tool

Media, Public Health, and Colluding With Murder: The Development of a Domestic Violence Perpetrator Collusion Measurement Tool.

We propose an experimental design to empirically establish the potential link between the media portrayal of DV and changes in an individual's DV descriptive and injunctive social norms. Specifically, this study will measure the degree to which people implicitly collude with DV perpetration.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Condition 1: Perpetrator Positive; Other: Condition 2: Perpetrator Negative; Other: Condition 3: Placebo

Detailed Description

Aim 1: To determine the impact of media "frames," "labeling," and "information inclusion" on "implicit collusion" with a DV perpetrator.

Hypotheses: Consumers exposed to media reports using "thematic frames" will be less likely to implicitly collude with perpetrators than those exposed to "episodic frames." Consumers exposed to DVH news stories labeled as "domestic violence" will be less likely to implicitly collude with perpetrators than consumers exposed to news stories labeled as "assault." Implicit collusion will correlate positively with the addition of non-relevant perpetrator "humanizing" characteristics. Consumers given negative information about the victim of DVH will be more likely to implicitly collude with the perpetrator than consumers given negative information about the perpetrator.

Aim 2: To determine how media portrayals of domestic violence impact descriptive and injunctive norms about domestic violence and, ultimately, drive implicit collusion with perpetrators.

Hypotheses: Controlling for individual pre-existing attitudes and social norms, consumers exposed to thematic frames or the label of DV will be less likely to shift their norms in a way that supports DV than those exposed to episodic frames or the label of assault. Consumers provided negative victim information or non-relevant characteristics that humanize the perpetrator will be more likely to shift their norms to accept DV.

Exploratory Aim: To identify racial/ethnic, gender, age, and regional differences in DV social norms.

Hypothesis: The media will differentially impact subpopulation DV attitudes, social norms and implicit collusion.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 72
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United States
  • Connecticut
    • New Haven, Connecticut, United States, 06519
      • Yale University
  • Louisiana
    • New Orleans, Louisiana, United States, 70118
      • Loyola University New Orleans
  • Michigan
    • East Lansing, Michigan, United States, 48824
      • Michigan State University
    • Lansing, Michigan, United States, 48913
      • Michigan Department of Community Health

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Members of the public who are 18 years or older, who identify as White or African American or Hispanic.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Members of the public will be excluded if they are unable to read or understand English.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Screening
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

3

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Condition 1; Each study arm contains different scenarios presented to the participant. Condition 1 is a Perpetrator Positive scenario. The content of the Condition 1 group is as follows: Framing: Episodic Labeling: DV label Extraneous Information: Perpetrator positive non relevant Victim/Perp Characteristic: Negative victim	Other: Condition 1: Perpetrator Positive; Condition 1 frames the event as episodic, labels the event as domestic violence, uses a positive description of the perpetrator, and a negative description of the victim.
Experimental: Condition 2; Each study arm contains different scenarios presented to the participant. Condition 2 is a Perpetrator Negative scenario. The content of the Condition 2 group is as follows: Framing: Thematic Labeling: Assault label Extraneous Information: Perpetrator neutral non relevant Victim/Perp Characteristic: Negative Perpetrator	Other: Condition 2: Perpetrator Negative; The condition 2 intervention/exposure frames the event as thematic, labels the event as assault, uses a neutral description of the perpetrator, and a negative description of the perpetrator.
Placebo Comparator: Condition 3; Each study arm contains different scenarios presented to the participant. The content of the Condition 3 group is as follows: Framing: Neither Labeling: No label Extraneous Information: None Victim/Perp Characteristic: None	Other: Condition 3: Placebo; This intervention provides no details for the participant and is for comparison use in the study.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change from Baseline on The Collusion Framing Subscale	The scale will be developed based on the changes from baseline.	The scale is administered at baseline and then following the sub experiment for a total of 2 times, 30 minutes apart.
Change from Baseline on The Collusion Labeling Subscale	The scale will be developed based on the changes from baseline.	The scale is administered at baseline and then following the sub experiment for a total of 2 times, 30 minutes apart.
Change from Baseline on The Collusion Extraneous Information Subscale	The scale will be developed based on the changes from baseline.	The scale is administered at baseline and then following the sub experiment for a total of 2 times, 30 minutes apart.
Change from Baseline on The Collusion Negative Characteristics Subscale	The scale will be developed based on the changes from baseline.	The scale is administered at baseline and then following the sub experiment for a total of 2 times, 30 minutes apart.

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Yale University

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start: July 1, 2009
• Primary Completion (Actual): January 1, 2010
• Study Completion (Actual): January 1, 2010

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: August 30, 2013
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 10, 2013
• First Posted (Estimated): September 16, 2013

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): August 30, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: August 29, 2023
• Last Verified: August 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: IPV
• Other Study ID Numbers: 0910005885