Citation

Schwartz LE, Howell KH, Jamison LE, Decker KM, Thurston IB. Partner Abuse 2021; 12(2): 112-129.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, Springer Publishing)

DOI

10.1891/PA-2020-0017

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Resilience is gaining attention in trauma research, but how it is conceptualized across studies often differs. Further, limited empirical research has been conducted on group-level resilience factors in the context of intimate partner violence (IPV). The current study assessed resilience using two models (i.e., social-ecological and "bounce back") by investigating how resilience resource variables across the social ecology cluster together and relate to an individual's ability to bounce back after experiencing IPV. Latent profile analysis was used to generate profiles of individual (spirituality), social (social support, community cohesion), cultural (ethnic identity), and physical (use of public assistance) resources consistent with the social-ecological model of resilience. Differences among the latent profiles on overall resilience scores were investigated. Participants were 160 women (M_age = 34.7, 69% Black-identified, 75% with yearly household income less than $20,000) who experienced IPV in the past 6 months. Four resource profiles emerged: (a) generally high (GH); (b) low individual and cultural (LIC); (c) high physical (HP); and (d) low social (LS). The GH profile reported significantly higher resilience than the LIC profile.

FINDINGS suggest nuanced variations in resources among women experiencing adversity. These varied resource profiles relate to unique differences in resilience among women exposed to IPV. Based on these findings, interventions to address IPV may be most impactful if they promote stronger ethnic identity and increased spirituality. Future research should build on this work by utilizing more systems-level conceptualizations of resilience and including factors that capture not only physical resources, but also individual, social, and cultural resources.

Language: en